Global South: Defining the Term

The Global South is separated from the Global North by criteria such as economic development, living standards, and resource availability, among others. The approach has shifted from emphasizing development and cultural diversity to a more comprehensive focus on complex geopolitical power relations. The Global South refers to decolonized nations located south of old colonial centers of power, encompassing countries outside the Northern-Western core of political and economic interactions. It represents systemic inequalities from colonialism and imperialism, alternative sources of power, and resistance against Northern dominance and global hegemonic power. The Global South is often associated with the Group of seventy-seven (G-77) at the UN and countries referred to as “developing.” The G-77 was established in 1964 by seventy-seven developing countries as part of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Its institutional structure evolved over time, with Chapters in Geneva, Nairobi, Paris, Rome, Vienna, and Washington, DC. The original name was retained due to its historical significance. The G-77 is the largest intergovernmental organization of developing countries in the United Nations, enabling South countries to articulate and promote their collective economic interests, enhance their joint negotiating capacity on major international economic issues, and promote South-South Cooperation (SSC) for development. The organization has expanded to 134 members, but its original name remains significant (Group of 77, 2024).

The definition of the Global South is subject to variation depending on the specific situation and how it is interpreted (Haug, 2021). The subject matter encompasses the consequences of past wrongdoings committed via colonialism and imperialism, as well as the emergence of new forms of authority and understanding. The statement underscores the growing significance of these countries in different areas, as well as their mutual reliance. The Global South is often associated with socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, as shown by per capita income and the Human Development Index (HDI). The nations in question are grappling with a range of challenges, including poverty, famine, malnutrition, inadequate education, prevalent illness, and political instability (Kowalski, Reference Kowalski, Filho, Azul, Brandli, Salvia, Özuyar and Wall2021). The notion of the Global South emphasizes the difficulties encountered by countries that are not categorized as high-income or advanced economies in fulfilling fundamental needs as a result of their common history of colonialism (Policy Center for the New South, 2023).

The Global South refers to a collection of nations, mostly located outside of the Western Hemisphere. Nevertheless, not all non-Western nations are included, which leaves the concept somewhat vague and sometimes contradictory. However, it offers valuable information and aligns with the concurrent growth of the countries it includes, and their aspiration to have a voice in international affairs and establish a non-Western type of leadership.

Academics frequently use the phrase Global South to describe nations and areas with diverse economic and cultural traits, making it difficult to categorize them under a single umbrella term. South America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania are examples of regions in the Global South with poor incomes and cultural or political marginalization. The notion arose from postcolonial conflicts and the separation between Western and non-Western states, and it describes parts of the world that suffer the impacts of restricted globalization as a result of their marginalization in the global system. It may also be interpreted as a metaphor for some parts of the U.S. and Russia, which are considered part of the more developed Global North, and nations in the Global South, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE (Mignolo, Reference Mignolo2011). The concept has gained prominence in scholarly publications, university research centers, and among activists throughout the world. While countries in the Global South are considered as far less developed than those in the Global North, they continue to play a vital role in supplying the required natural resources on which the Global North depends. Leaders of countries and businesses with worldwide influence may fail to prioritize the well-being of the great majority of the world’s people, potentially denying them access to future prospects (Mignolo, Reference Mignolo2011).

The European Union’s (EU) decision of July 2024, to impose tariffs on Chinese electric cars (EVs) is one recent example. In its biggest trade case to date, the EU intends to levy tariffs of up to 37.6 percent on Chinese electric car imports, escalating tensions with Beijing. The four-month-long temporary tariffs are intended to stop an influx of low-cost EVs that were constructed with government subsidies. This was put into effect in July 2024 and emphasizes the difficulties of leadership in the globalized age. There is a review in November 2024, after which a decision for a five-year extension will be made. While the EU’s commitment to a sustainable future through encouraging EV adoption is commendable, it seems at odds with the protectionist measures employed. The EU’s domestic EV industry is not yet mature enough to compete with established Chinese manufacturers on price, pushing the EU toward protectionism. This traditional, inward-looking leadership style prioritizes immediate economic benefits for domestic players, raising concerns about its long-term efficacy in terms of strategic leadership.

The EU’s current strategy might be flawed as it may stifle innovation, miss opportunities for collaboration, and increase consumer costs. Protectionist measures can create a sheltered environment for domestic industries, potentially reducing the incentive for European EV manufacturers to invest heavily in R&D. Additionally, they may miss out on potential fruitful collaborations with Chinese manufacturers, leading to faster breakthroughs in battery technology, charging infrastructure, and overall vehicle design.

Alternative approaches for sustainable leadership include increased investment in R&D, focusing on innovation within the domestic EV industry, and strategic partnerships with established manufacturers like China. By fostering a culture of creativity and leveraging Chinese expertise while fostering its own technological advancements, the EU can achieve its environmental goals while ensuring the long-term competitiveness of its domestic EV industry. This approach would position the EU as a leader in the green transportation revolution, paving the way for a more sustainable future.

The Global South, encompassing nations across Africa, Asia, and Latin America, is undergoing substantial economic expansion, altering the global terrain. This growth, coupled with their cultural impact and increasing empowerment, highlights their potential to drive substantial and transformative change on a global scale.

Roots

With ample opportunities for future growth as well as challenges related to the collective past, the Global South, a concept rooted in decolonization movements and the desire for a postcolonial international framework, is distinguished by unity among former colonial nations despite their diverse histories, cultural traditions, economic paths, and administrative systems.

With a plethora of future opportunities, as well as challenges related to the collective past, the Global South emerged from anti-colonial movements in the 20th century, including the Bandung Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement. The concept has evolved from being called the Third World to a more sophisticated term, avoiding historical baggage and hierarchical ranking systems, and now encompasses a broader understanding of political and economic differences and global interconnectedness, moving away from older labels. Although there is no universally accepted definition, the Global South refers to a collection of emerging countries that share certain features such as:

• Exploring the physical location and underdeveloped countries. Although no longer strictly adhered to, the word originally referred to nations in the Southern Hemisphere, albeit this is not a distinguishing feature. The economic part of this term is frequently examined using GDP per capita, HDI, and poverty rates (Arrighi & Silver, 2005).

• Exploring the notion of the Global South through the eyes of former colonies and their shared experiences. Several nations in the Global South have a colonial history, which has had a significant impact on their political and economic systems (Prashad, Reference Prashad2012). The Global South idea entails a shared knowledge of development challenges, unequal power distribution, and the pursuit of a more equitable global system (The South Centre, 2024).

The concept represents a shift in ideological and political stance, moving away from the term Third World to better encompass ongoing struggles related to colonialism’s lasting impacts. The Global South promotes a vision of international relations emphasizing equality, freedom, and mutual respect, aiming to establish a new framework of power and subjectivity uninfluenced by colonial legacies. The region operates without a centralized structure or designated leadership, emphasizing international solidarity and shared responsibility. It critiques institutional and cultural norms influenced by colonialism and imperialism, advocating for a new global order centered on collective responsibility and ethical principles.

Shedding light on the obstacles developing countries face in their struggle against more industrialized powers, current trends include the creation of alliances among countries in different areas to counteract dominating powers such as China. Key themes and dominant narratives include colonial legacies, economic inequities, and opposition to empires. Intellectual movements such as subaltern studies and notions like “coloniality of power” have contributed significantly to our understanding of the Global South’s history and challenges. The Global South refers to a complex set of economic, cultural, and political elements that impact behavior and interactions in this region (Dados & Cornell, Reference Dados and Connell2012).

Influence

The globe is nearing the end of Western dominance, with 88 percent of the world’s population residing in the Global South. At his Voice of Global South summit in January 2023, Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, said: “We, the Global South, have the largest stakes in the future … As the eight decade-old model of global governance slowly changes, we should try to shape the emerging order.” Many Global South countries, including South America, Africa, and Asia, are no longer passive participants on the world stage but acting independently of the West. This growing sense of Global South agency is evident in the fact that states representing 85 percent of the world’s population have not imposed sanctions on Russia even though the majority of countries in the Global South condemned the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine (Mahbubani, Reference Mahbubani and House2024).

The influence of the Global South in global affairs is on the rise as its economic production continues to grow. With nearly 60 percent of the global GDP and approximately 85 percent of the world’s population, the Global South is becoming an increasingly significant player on the world stage. As a nation’s power and influence increase, its desire for success also increases. For example, as a tremendously ambitious country, China aims to assume a prominent position on the world stage. China’s economic power and ability to exert influence and pressure on other developing countries is currently only surpassed by that of the U.S. Several nations are increasingly eager to establish connections and exert their influence on governments in regions commonly referred to as the Global South. India’s Prime Minister Modi takes great pride in highlighting India’s significant role as a major trading partner and source of foreign direct investment for Africa. Additionally, India is deepening its connections with the Gulf states. Brazil, a powerhouse in agriculture, highlights the importance of ensuring food security. Turkish companies are actively involved in developing infrastructure projects across East Africa.

The Global South holds significant influence but also presents challenges in reaching consensus on various issues due to its vast diversity. It is difficult to maintain a consistent position on human rights when the group consists of democracies, absolute monarchies, hereditary dictatorships, and military-run governments. A group of countries consisting of economically disadvantaged countries reliant on energy imports and affluent nations with abundant oil resources faces difficulties in maintaining a unified position on the issue of climate change. In the short run, it is quite improbable that security cooperation will be realized throughout the spectrum of the BRICS-Plus countries, given the adversarial relationships between certain countries, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia or India and China.

Given the diversity of economic systems, ranging from authoritarian, government-controlled financial systems to more liberal ones, the concept of building robust and unequivocal financial linkages, such as a shared currency, becomes quite intricate.

Nonetheless, the novelty of this Element is to investigate the new global leadership concept focused on the distinct divide that has emerged within the Global South, distinguishing between economically disadvantaged and influential countries, different tiers of development within the Global South, and a fragmented Global South. This differentiation underscores the diverse challenges and circumstances experienced by countries, particularly with the ascent of nations like India and China. The impact of these two nations has been significant; although, it may not fully represent the realities faced by other areas such as Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. China and India, as sovereign states in the Global South, are making significant contributions to the global economic landscape with remarkable speed.

China has experienced a tremendous economic change, rapidly emerging as a global economic powerhouse after the reforms implemented in the late 1970s with the introduction of the Open Door Policy by Deng Xiaoping. These changes signified a substantial transition from a centrally planned economy to a market-oriented economy, therefore attracting foreign investment and commerce. The period witnessed the formation of special economic zones, industrial modernization, and substantial infrastructural upgrades. As a consequence, China’s GDP increased dramatically, pulling millions out of poverty and cementing the country’s place as a major participant in the global economy.

China’s dominance in international trade and manufacturing, as well as its technical competition with the U.S., has global repercussions for several sectors. Its size and influence make it a significant force on the world stage. China’s Belt and Road Initiative officially launched in 2013 showcases its determination to establish itself as a prominent player in the global economy through a vast infrastructure development project. India has just begun to lay the groundwork for imitating China’s model of fast economic expansion and modernization, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi (recently reelected for a third term in June, 2024). Prime Minster Modi’s administration has implemented a series of ambitious reforms to liberalize the economy, attract foreign investment, and improve infrastructure. This vision is centered on key programs like “Make in India,” which supports manufacturing and local production, and “Digital India,” which strives to improve the country’s digital infrastructure and connections.

Furthermore, attempts to simplify corporate rules, promote talent development, and increase ease of doing business are part of a larger goal to convert India into a worldwide economic powerhouse. By adopting elements of China’s economic approach, India hopes to accelerate its development trajectory, generate millions of employment, and considerably enhance its population’s living standards. India is predicted to become the world’s third-largest economy by 2027, with a nominal GDP of $3.4 trillion. The country has climbed to the fifth position with structural reforms, enhancing its macroeconomic landscape. India’s GDP is set to reach $5 trillion within four years, with a target of nearly $10 trillion by 2030, predicting a 6 percent annual GDP growth rate over the next five years, surpassing most large economies (Laker, Reference Laker2024).

The Global South, as a collective of emerging nations, is increasingly making its voice heard in global politics on various issues. China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi has described the Global South as a key force for reforming the international order, and a source of hope as the world undergoes profound changes unseen in a century. However, it is less clear whether this broad grouping can translate shared concern into meaningful action. In order to accomplish this, it will need to manage internal differences and a global landscape characterized by significant power rivalry, notably the deteriorating ties between the two dominant powers, China and the U.S.

The current competition underway in the Pacific Island Countries exemplifies this trend. As China’s economic and security ties with these nations deepen, the U.S., along with its allies and partners, is intensifying its efforts to counterbalance China’s influence by renewing engagement and opening new embassies, including in the Solomon Islands and Tonga. This deepening distrust between China and the U.S. is now affecting their relationships with many Global South countries, putting them in the uncomfortable position of having to make choices they didn’t sign up for.

China and India are currently navigating challenging bilateral relations since normalizing their relations four decades ago. Both China and India have made attempts to bring Global South nations together, but not all countries will join the bloc. However, they will both play a major role in the Global South and will continue to do so in future expansion of the BRICS-Plus. The Global South bloc is confronting a multitude of issues subsequent to the Voice of the Global South Summit, which was held in India in November 2023. They emphasize that it is not appropriate for any nation to be forced to make a decision between combating poverty and protecting the environment. They advocate for the future of climate action to be guided by principles of fairness, climate justice, and the concept of “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities.” Reaching a consensus on political rebalancing is a delicate task, particularly due to the opposition and delay of China, a key member and supporter of the Global South, which also happens to be one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (UNSC) and is against any revisions to the UNSC reforms.

According to Brazil’s President, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, there is a strong sense of unity within the Global South. Nevertheless, a common thread among countries in the Global South is their criticism of what they see as the dominance of the Western world. The Global South expresses deep concern over what it sees as a limited focus on Ukraine and unmet obligations regarding climate funding (Krishnan, 2024). South Africa’s recent move to file a genocide complaint against Israel at the International Court of Justice in January 2024 is worth noting.

Challenges and Concerns

There is a concern that the concept of the Global South could potentially lead to the development of a complex form of nihilism. China may seek to exploit this idea by blending the notion of being a developing nation on the trajectory of a high-income country with anti-Western sentiments, thereby adopting an adversarial position against global liberal values (AP News, 2024). At the UN, China presents itself as a member of the Global South as an alternative to a Western model.

In the realm of international discourse, the Global South has gained significant attention. However, it is important to recognize that the concept of the Global South oversimplifies complex realities and fails to acknowledge the diverse economic interests, development paths, and political traditions that exist within these countries. The concept of the Global South involves understanding the locations where global futures are shaped through a process of disengagement from the colonial power structure. Decolonization is a voluntary process, not something that is imposed. This option can include regions in the southern part of the world and marginalized communities in the northern regions (for example, the southern states in the U.S.). On the other hand, numerous countries are situated below the equator and encompassed within the Global South. Our novel perspective challenges the traditional view of the Southern Hemisphere and instead includes a worldwide area consisting of developing and growing nations, known as the Global South, which provide raw materials to more industrialized countries. Essentially, we assert that the concept of the Global South goes beyond only geographical location. It encompasses an ideological viewpoint that sheds light on the unequal economic, political, and knowledge-based interactions within the global world order, as seen from the perspective of marginalized communities.

Opportunities and New Avenues

A fresh viewpoint is needed when examining the Global South in the context of globalization. López (Reference López2007) argues that our understanding of the Global South as the Third World or former colonies is antiquated. Globalization is also responsible for worldwide poverty, displacement, and environmental devastation. Examining the Global South as a unified entity enables one to transcend geographical and ideological boundaries. The Global South is a complex phenomenon that warrants a thorough examination in the context of globalization. It transcends geographical boundaries and necessitates a focus on marginalized and disenfranchised individuals. The Global South has witnessed the emergence of different transnational movements and ideologies that have frequently come into conflict with nationalist sentiments and struggled to establish enduring supranational identities. The ongoing conflicts within developing nations have a significant impact on global politics, which in turn questions the idea of a cohesive Global South. In addition, elites from non-Western regions have demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with the West in order to attain economic and security objectives. This further complicates the notion of a distinct division between the Global South and the Global North.

Moreover, it is evident that the countries in the Global South are experiencing substantial changes, characterized by certain notable trends. Undeniably, there are distinct factors that differentiate them from other regions. Despite ongoing disparities with other regions, numerous countries in the Global South have witnessed significant economic progress in recent years. This growth has been fueled by various factors such as industrialization, urbanization, and foreign investment (World Bank, 2023), although other changes are at stake. As these societies progress, it is crucial to acknowledge the significant influence of the growing middle class in driving the economies of developing regions. This particular group of individuals and customers has emerged as a significant driving force behind the economies of various nations. Consequently, we need to recognize and value their significant influence on these nations’ future opportunities. Considering the requirements and ambitions of this growing group is of utmost importance, and it is essential to create possibilities that will benefit their communities. The substantial economic expansion in many countries in the Global South has led to the rise of a rapidly growing middle class, thus leading to shifts in spending patterns and social structures (OECD, 2022).

Furthermore, the Global South is witnessing a remarkable surge in technological progress, specifically regarding mobile phone usage and internet availability. These advancements have profoundly affected various aspects, such as communication, education, and economic prospects (International Telecommunication Union, ITU, 2023). Finally, the region is currently witnessing a rise in social movements and transitions toward democracy, with a focus on promoting equality, human rights, and environmental sustainability (UN DESA, 2023).

The Global South’s economic leadership and the perceived demise of the West are subjects of an active and lively debate (Gray & Gills, Reference Gray and Gills2016). There are diverse viewpoints about the possibilities of economic growth in the Global South, with some seeing it as a means to emancipation from the hegemony of the Global North. Conversely, several individuals see it as an integral component of the prevailing global capitalist growth paradigm. The intentions of elites in the Global South about their position on the dominating institutions of global capitalism are now a subject of continuous dispute. The current economic expansion in some parts of the globe has the capacity to alter the distribution of power and the governance of global organizations. However, we would like to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the Global North potentially influencing the Global South to join restructured global governance organizations, leading to the establishment of a consensus among a global elite about development. The conventional division of global power dynamics is becoming less relevant, particularly in light of China’s rapid economic growth. This change in power dynamics emphasizes the importance of developing a deeper understanding of regional and global matters. Although the Global North-South framework may have its limitations, it can be a useful foundation for examining global issues. By critically analyzing these categories and tools, we can improve existing tools or create new frameworks to better understand the evolving global landscape.

Expanding on the distinguishing characteristics that constitute the Global South, the next section explores leadership challenges and opportunities, as well as their substantial impact on the global landscape, and sets the stage for the forthcoming evaluation and discourse on economic and cross-cultural leadership and diverse approaches.

Challenging the Global Order

Controversy surrounds whether elites of the Global South and “rising powers” genuinely intend to challenge current relationships with the arbiters of dominant structures of global capitalist development or seek to support and reproduce these structures while altering their global position in the system and increasing their influence within the existing structures. Some may view the trajectory of rising economic growth, industrialization, and financial capacity as a step toward reshaping global power relations and reforming global governance institutions through the implementation of global economic norms and regulations. This trend may lead to the construction of a global elite agreement on development, creating a “fictional unity” around the concept of a globalized and open world economy.

In a 2023 interview with African Business, Lord Jim O’Neill, the creator of the BRIC moniker (originally designated to Brazil, Russia, India, and China in 2001), discussed the future of this economic bloc and its potential impact on Africa. While acknowledging that the economic performance of BRICS (since South Africa joined the group in 2010) has not met initial expectations, he emphasizes that these nations collectively now outperform the G7 (the G7, a group of leading industrialized nations, comprised initially of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the U.S.). Russia was formally asked to join in 1998, bringing the total number of members to eight. This move reflected a desire to strengthen commercial and political connections with Russia following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. However, this inclusion was short-lived. In 2014, the other G7 countries protested Russia’s annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and barred Russia from attending the annual conference. The group reverted to the G7 format, indicating a substantial shift in the geopolitical situation. The EU is also a “non-enumerated member” in terms of economic size. Lord O’Neill goes on to say that the BRICS might potentially rival the G7’s political power in the global arena (African Business, 2023). However, as Lord O’Neill points out, the BRICS has obstacles, such as a lack of agreement between China and India and the possibility that the U.S. will withdraw preferential status for BRICS members. O’Neill views a unified BRICS currency as unrealistic but expects renminbi and rupee to become dominant currencies, as BRICS prioritizes de-dollarization for intra-bloc commerce.

Global Traction and Influence

With the BRICS-Plus countries’ apparent economic strength and distinct development styles, it is no surprise that countries in the Global South are gaining traction as major economic actors and critical players on the world stage. The winds of change are swirling throughout the global economic landscape. Countries once on the periphery are becoming significant economic powers and critical builders of the future global order. Their growing economic weight, vast resources, and thriving populations alter global power dynamics. As the world becomes more integrated, these nations rise to the occasion and make their voices known. Their efforts are invaluable and demonstrate their worth. While the term Global South is ambiguous, some propose abolishing it (Patrick, Reference Patrick2023).

As mentioned earlier, the Global South now includes increasingly influential and prosperous rising nations, and reliable predictions suggest that many more countries from the Global South will become similarly important in the future. Economic growth has increased the power of these nations. Several nations in the Global South have high GDP levels. The demands put forward by the countries of the Global South have instigated significant political and economic disruptions that the Western nations must adjust to. The countries’ strength has been bolstered by the expansion of their economies. Regarding GDP adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP), India is the world’s third-largest economy (Mitra, 2023), followed by Indonesia and Brazil. Meanwhile, the G7’s share of global GDP has decreased from 50.48 percent to 29.64 percent since 1980 to 2024, partly due to China’s ascent and the most recent rise of the Global South (IMF, 2024).

Like representative nations of the Global North, the Global South is gradually asserting itself as a significant force shaping the global landscape rather than simply receiving international influence. The Global South actively influences global economic and political issues through its combined economic strength, vast resources, and growing political clout. One expression is a desire for forceful nonalignment between the U.S. and China. This is not the twentieth century’s nonalignment but rather a fluctuating alliance based on the issue at hand.

The Impact of Conflict

Conflict alters and shapes the regions and the balance of power. The current example is Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. While most developing countries oppose the invasion, they are unwilling to participate in sanctions despite the West’s urging. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent shockwaves around the world. Beyond the immediate humanitarian disaster, the conflict had far-reaching economic and geopolitical ramifications that are being felt today. Despite not being directly implicated, these effects have had a significant negative impact on the Global South. The implications for significant economic and social factors must be grasped, such as rising inflation, government actions to strengthen resilience, and potential adjustments in alignments between the BRICS-Plus bloc and the Global South are just a few of the long-term implications that will emerge. As the war progresses, continual analysis is critical to understanding its full impact on the world stage, particularly in the Global South. In addition to having a direct impact on inflation, government spending priorities, and geopolitical alliances between the BRICS-Plus group and the Global South, the Russia-Ukraine war caused severe disruptions in global supply systems, notably for basic commodities such as food and oil. Russia and Ukraine are major wheat, corn, and sunflower oil producers, accounting for nearly 30 percent of global wheat exports before the war (IMF, 2022).

Furthermore, Russia is a major energy producer influencing global oil and gas prices. The disruption in supply, combined with sanctions placed on Russia, caused a dramatic surge in commodity prices. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has increased world inflation by 1.3 percent points in 2022 (World Bank, 2023). This inflationary increase has had an impact on economies around the world, particularly those in the Global South, which rely significantly on imported food and fuel. The interruptions caused by the war, together with sanctions imposed on Russia, resulted in a significant spike in world commodity prices. According to the IMF, “[the war] was opined to push inflation to 8.7 percent for advanced economies and 9.4 percent for emerging markets and developing economies” (International Food Policy Research Institute, IFPRI, 2022). This inflationary increase has disproportionately affected low-income people and developing countries, many of whom were already dealing with rising food and energy prices before the war (Caldara, Conlisk, Iacoviello, & Penn, 2022). In reaction to growing inflation and supply chain disruptions, governments all around the world have shifted their public expenditure priorities. Many created social safety net initiatives to protect disadvantaged populations from the rising cost of living. Additionally, public spending on national security and defense has expanded dramatically. For example, numerous European countries have declared significant increases in defense budgets in reaction to the perceived threat posed by the war (The New York Times, 2023). This shift in spending priorities reflects an increasing emphasis on developing resilience to future geopolitical upheavals.

The increasing availability of resources, change in priorities, and the enforcement of policies are compelling leadership in the Global South to recognize and adapt to the changing direction of the global system that might have been compelled to expedite its progress due to the food crisis and inflation. The driving reason for the revival of the notion of the Global South is the process of including more nations. In fact, the resurgence of the Global South idea and its prominence may be attributed to their efforts to include other nations.

The conflict has also forced a rethinking of global power relations. The BRICS-Plus bloc, which has always positioned itself as a counterweight to Western domination, is in a perilous situation. Russia’s activities have strained relations with other BRICS members, particularly India and South Africa, which have advocated for a diplomatic conclusion to the crisis. This disagreement inside the BRICS-Plus alliance could have far-reaching consequences for the Global South. Many developing countries rely on Russia and Western nations for commerce and investment, which could cause a schism between Russia or Western nations and other emerging markets. The battle may prompt these countries to broaden their alliances and reconsider their strategic alignments.

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is only one example of international hostility that has harmed global ties and generated significant economic and political consequences for numerous countries. Another example is Southeast Asia’s balancing of tight economic links with China and security relations with the U.S. There are barriers to the Global South playing a larger international political role. Individual countries’ interests differ depending on their geographical location, size, natural resource endowment, and level of development. For example, China’s Southeast Asian neighbors face a different scenario than South American countries inside the U.S. sphere of influence. Brazil has substantially greater levels of development than Vietnam. Similarly, a giant like India is unlikely to share the same world vision as a smaller country like Chile, resulting in the region’s diversity of perceptions and worldviews.

A Glimpse into the Future: Growing Pains

As mentioned before, The Global South is establishing a fresh path in economic leadership, going beyond the paradigms previously established by a small group of developed countries. However, nations such as the BRICS-Plus bloc, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Türkiye, and others are emerging as key actors in the Global South. These countries have thriving economies, sizable populations, and an expanding global influence. They are determining the future of global trade, investment, and development. As a result, the growth of the Global South, a varied group of emerging countries with a common history of colonialism and a growing economic presence, is threatening the global status quo.

Despite its enormous potential, the Global South faces a fundamental challenge in the form of a lack of a unified leadership core, with the BRICS-Plus bloc emerging as a viable competitor for the leadership mantle. Internal conflicts restrict the bloc’s ability to give coordinated leadership to the Global South. China’s huge economic and political influence casts a long shadow, prompting concerns about its control, while other members, particularly India and South Africa, have taken a more cautious approach to foreign affairs, frequently contradicting China’s viewpoint. Argentina’s exclusion from the BRICS-Plus membership in late December 2023, as a result of the decision made by the incoming right-wing President Javier Milei, highlights the ideological diversity within the BRICS-Plus coalition. Mile’s unconventional economic policies and social ideas may jeopardize efforts to provide a cohesive picture of the Global South. The absence of a single leader among the BRICS-Plus group does not rule out the potential of collective action in the Global South. Adding new members from a wider spectrum of political and economic systems may result in a more diverse and representative leadership structure. This might pave the way for shared aims and a more united voice on critical issues facing developing countries, such as climate change, trade policies, and access to development resources. Recent initiatives in the Global South highlight the prospect of a more collaborative leadership paradigm. The formation of the NDB by the BRICS-Plus bloc countries shows a coordinated effort to promote economic cooperation and development in the South, often known as SSC. Furthermore, the growing economic might of individual countries like India and Indonesia enables them to speak up and take the lead on certain issues.

The Global South is developing in a multifaceted manner, rather than as a single entity. While the BRICS-Plus group provides a credible framework for leadership, its internal dynamics and the rise of alternative voices paint a more nuanced picture. To attain authentic leadership in the Global South, governments must handle complexity, foster collaboration, and prioritize the region’s shared interests. Argentina’s political changes, led by President Javier Milei in December 2023, have created new viewpoints and a potential surge in populism across the Global South. This, combined with the sustained relevance of regional powers like Brazil, creates a volatile and unpredictable situation, making the future likely to be chaotic and unpredictable (Miller, Reference Miller2024). However, by focusing efforts on common goals and inclusive institutions, the Global South has the potential to build a more coherent and influential voice in the global arena.

Furthermore, the breadth and variety of the Global South provide major challenges. These regions are characterized by varying economic growth, political viewpoints, and geopolitical objectives, making it difficult for a single entity to have complete dominance. The Element suggests a novel approach, headed by the BRICS-Plus, emphasizing a new type of leadership. Morever, the BRICS-Plus partnership has sparked debate. China’s booming economy and military may cast a long shadow over the other countries in the Global South, raising fears about its ability to dominate the region. Other BRICS-Plus countries, particularly India, have expressed opposition to being treated as mere Chinese satellites (The BRICS Post, 2024).

The debate surrounding the expansion of the BRICS-Plus bloc is multifaceted and influenced by various perspectives. Proponents argue that the inclusion of more countries could challenge Western dominance in global affairs, as the combined economic strength of BRICS countries surpasses that of the G7. The group’s size and population suggest its growing significance on the world stage, potentially influencing global agendas and policies, particularly in development issues affecting the Global South. However, skeptics raise concerns about potential challenges of cohesion within the expanded BRICS bloc, as the inclusion of countries with varying political, economic, and social interests could lead to internal tensions and hinder consensus on key issues. This fragmentation may undermine the effectiveness of BRICS-Plus as a unified force for change and limit its ability to translate economic strength into meaningful global influence. The trajectory of BRICS-Plus and its impact on global dynamics will depend on how effectively its members navigate internal differences, forge common ground, and leverage their collective strengths to advance shared objectives.

At a Crossroad

The Global South is at a crossroads. While the absence of a single leader may impede some forms of collective action, it also provides an opportunity for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to leadership. By promoting cooperation and harnessing individual members’ capabilities, the Global South can traverse the complexity of the international stage and chart a more solid course for the future. On paper, the BRICS-Plus group is a strong economic and political force, with a combined population of over four billion people and a sizable share of global GDP. However, various issues limit the bloc’s ability to operate as a single leader. The admission of China, which has significant economic and political strength, has generated fears about group dominance. Smaller members may be unwilling to speak out for fear of China’s influence. Furthermore, the recently expanded BRICS-Plus alliance broadens its interests, potentially complicating consensus-building (The BRICS Post, 2024). With the BRICS-Plus group encountering internal constraints and new voices gaining strength, the Global South’s leadership conundrum becomes even more complicated.

The fundamental issue is navigating this variety while establishing a sense of collaborative action. This may have various shared goals:

• Prioritizing shared interests, such as climate change, global trade, and sustainable development, can foster collaboration between the Global South and the international community.

• Creating inclusive regional organizations that reflect the Global South’s different political and economic realities can lead to more collaboration in addressing common concerns.

• Encouraging economic and intellectual interaction among nations in the Global South can boost economic growth and reduce reliance on conventional power systems.

It is vital to note that leadership in the Global South does not necessarily belong to any particular regional bloc or nation. New and novel forms of cooperation and partnership may arise as developing countries seek progress. These countries can achieve their common aims and promote positive change by working together and exploring new ideas. Regional groups like the African Union and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) might play a larger role in establishing regional agendas and advocating for the Global South on a global scale.

In Search for Leadership

The ongoing hunt for successful leadership among Global South countries has yet to yield a definite conclusion. The BRICS-Plus alliance enhances the bloc’s participation, but its internal dynamics and recent expansion pose challenges, particularly considering the changes within the bloc. Additionally, the rise of populist movements and the growing relevance of regional organizations point to a more complicated leadership landscape. Multiple elements will form the Global South’s leadership, with no single entity wielding disproportionate power. If the Global South wishes to strike a balance between the U.S. and China by drawing resources from both countries, China, as a leadership model is a contradiction. Until a homegrown leadership arises, the Global South cannot participate in active nonalignment. The ramifications of a significantly stronger Global South can be grasped by examining the demands of Global South-affiliated organizations, such as the expanded BRICS-Plus bloc and the Group of 77.

The Global South advocates for increased representation in existing international institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the UN Security Council. Furthermore, we contend that resources should not only be distributed more equitably but also be made transparent and efficiently used, therefore significantly reducing the misallocation of financial and other resources. The proposal for a “loss and damage” fund is being explored in international climate negotiations. The region is a powerful international force, necessitating strong leadership that comprehends global power dynamics and cultural distinctions. The newly developed GSL Index, introduced for the first time in this Element, provides a framework for leadership across nations and cultures, which is essential for navigating the region’s different landscapes and cultivating collaboration, trust, and long-term solutions to global concerns. The complexity of leading across cultures underscores the need to understand these nuances. The following section will present methods and frameworks for assessing cross-cultural leadership, preparing leaders to traverse the cultural nuances of the Global South, bridge divisions, create cooperation, and achieve global success in a dynamic and interconnected world.

Methodology: The Rationale

The leadership index we developed, the GSL Index, is a composite of several approaches. Economic size, trade balance, currency strength, innovation rankings, and global governance indicators are some of the most common approaches; however, individually, they do not capture the full extent of the potential and do not provide a complete picture. Economic size, measured by GDP or GDP per capita, is a simple and readily available data measure of a country’s overall economic output. Trade balance, a comparison of a country’s exports and imports, shows a country’s role in international trade. Currency strength, analyzed by a nation’s currency value, indicates economic stability and leadership. Innovation rankings, based on metrics like patent registrations, research & development spending, and venture capital activity, assess a country’s innovative capacity. Global governance indicators, assessed by institutions like the World Bank, highlight the foundations for sustainable economic growth. Combining these approaches offers a different perspective, with GDP size capturing economic power, trade balance and currency strength focusing on international influence, innovation rankings, and governance indicators highlighting the underlying framework for economic success. No single method is perfect, and a more comprehensive picture of economic leadership likely requires a combination of these approaches, considering the focus on the Global South leadership context.

The analysis presented next provides best-fit linear equations from the ordinary least squares method and the R-squared values used to interpret how well the data fit the linear prediction line for several scatter plots. Each scatter plot shows the relationship between an economic factor and our leadership index. We considered four economic factors including the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (local currency unit [LCU] per international $), Gross National Income (GNI) per capita (constant LCU), Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) conversion factor, and the Gini Coefficient Index (named after statistician and sociologist Dr. Corrado Gini). Each economic metric was acquired from the World Bank 2023 Data. Before proceeding to the results, we discuss the methodology used to create the Global South Leadership (GSL) Index.

Methodology: The Global South Leadership Index

The newly developed instrument, the GSL Index framework, includes thirteen indices that score and rank fourteen countries representing four distinct regions. (Please see Appendix 1 for an inclusive table). It was developed by combining the ratings of each of the thirteen indices and averaging all indices’ scores by country. To create the GSL Index and to make comparisons or determine if trends exist between countries, scores were recorded for each index for the fourteen countries. Most indices are based on a 0 to 100 percent scale, with zero indicating the worst and 100 percent indicating the best. However, some of these indices have different lower and upper points, which could contribute differently to the GSL Index if used in their original form. If indices are kept in their raw form, some will have more influence than others. Instead, the desired approach is to have a balanced index with equal weight.

Since not all scores are evaluated on the same rating scale, this issue of inconsistent scales was addressed by converting all scores to a 0 to 100 percent scale, with a value of 100 percent indicating the best rating score and a value of 0 percent as the worst rating score for each scale. Additionally, one of the GSL Index’s rating scales was the opposite compared to all other indices, where the lower the rating, the better the outcome, and the higher the rating, the worse the outcome. To address this issue of opposite outcome scales, the original rating scales were converted on a 0 to 100 percent scale and then the score was subtracted from 100 percent. All indices prior to the conversion consisted of scoring scales with a larger value indicating a better outcome, except the Global Peace Index.

For indices with a scoring scale between 1.111 and 5.000 (Global Peace Index), where the value of 1.111 indicates the “most” peaceful country, we converted these scores based on the following formula and then multiplied the score by 100 percent.

$\text{Adjusted Score}=1-\frac{\left(Score-1.111\right)}{\left(5-1.111\right)}\times 100percent$

For indices that had a scoring scale between 1 percent and 100 percent (Global Marketing Potential Index – GMPI), these scores were converted based on the following formula:

$\text{Adjusted Score}=\frac{\left(Score-1\right)}{\left(100-1\right)}\times 100percent$

Once all scores per index were adjusted based on a 0 to 100 percent scale, each country was averaged across all indices to form the GSL Index. Fourteen countries were sorted and ranked based on this newly created GSL Index. The reasoning for averaging across all indices indicates that each index is equally important. Although there may be a strong indication that some indices may be more important than others, the goal was to use a plethora of indices across many economic and social metrics. By taking an average of many indices that explain the distinctive characteristics of each country, the findings yield a near-optimal index of a combination of economic and social performance.

Within the analysis, we included and examined several countries from multiple regions of the world, all part of the Global South. Two countries under consideration were removed from the final analysis due to limited information available for these two nations. The first country removed from the analysis was Taiwan. Out of the thirteen selected indices, there were no known scores for the country of Taiwan in eight out of these thirteen indices. The key data gap stems from the complex relationship between Taiwan and China. China, a major power, considers Taiwan a breakaway province, while Taiwan views itself as an independent nation. (Due to China’s significant economic and political clout, many of the thirteen indices combine data from both China and Taiwan and report it as a single score for China. This approach renders Taiwan’s specific data unavailable). The other country removed from the analysis was Venezuela. Venezuela has gone through periods of decline, including economic and political instability. Often instability leads to poor performance measure scores. Two of the index scores were unavailable for Venezuela, and several economic factors were unavailable, including the GDP per capita. Due to a nation’s poor economic performance, leaders often conceal information from the public. Important economic metrics are unavailable because of the concealment of information. For several reasons, other countries within the analysis did not have scores for each index. It is important to disclose countries and the index whose scores are not made available. Vietnam did not have any score for the Social Progress Index (SPI). Thus, we analyze thirteen scores for each country except Vietnam, which only consists of twelve metric scores.

To understand the relationships between the GSL Index and other economic metrics, several scatter plots of each economic metric and GSL Index score were created. Economic metrics considered for the analysis included GDP per capita (see Figure 1), PPP (see Figure 2), Gini Coefficient Index (see Figure 3), and GNI per capita (see Figure 4). Once the scatter plots were created, noticeable characteristics within each chart were observed.

Figure 1 GSL Index and GDP per capita.

This figure was created by the authors based on information from Appendix 1 and World Bank DataBank.

Figure 2 GSL Index and PPP.

This figure was created by the authors based on information from Appendix 1 and World Bank DataBank.

The data for PPP is based on a logarithmic scale to empathize with the results. For some countries, the PPP values are exceptionally large in magnitude compared to other countries, which have values of less magnitude for certain metrics.

Figure 3 Gini Coefficient Index and GSL Index.

This figure was created by the authors based on information from Appendix 1 and World Bank DataBank.

Figure 4 GSL Index and GNI.

This figure was created by the authors based on information from Appendix 1 and World Bank DataBank.

The GNI data is based on a logarithmic scale to visually comprehend the results in a comprehensive manner. For some countries, the GNI per capita values are exceptionally large compared to others, which have values of less magnitude for certain metrics.

Subsets of the thirteen indices were generated to see whether the proposed technique of weighting all indices equally was adequate. The first subset of indices includes nine of the original thirteen indices (Global Innovation Index, Global Sustainable Competitiveness Index, Global Economic Freedom Index, Global Marketing Potential Index, Global Human Development Index, Global Peace Index, Global Education Index, Global Environmental Performance Index, and the Global Transparency Index) (see Appendices 2, 4, 6, and 8). The second subset of indices includes six of the thirteen indices (Global Human Development Index, Global Happiness Index, Global Education Index, Global Health Security Index, Social Progress Index, and Global Gender Gap Index) (see Appendices 3, 5, 7, and 9). The next step was to conduct the same analysis by averaging across all six indices for subset one and nine indices for the second subset. These subset indices were plotted for each economic metric using the updated GSL Index score. (see scatter plots in Appendices 2 through 9).

We notice distinctive patterns between all sets of indices between the scatter plots for each respective economic metric, indicating that the approach of using thirteen indices is appropriate. All GDP per capita versus the GSL Index scatter plots show a fairly large R-squared value, indicating a fairly strong relationship between GDP per capita and the GSL Index score.

Drawing comparisons between countries for various metrics can be a valuable exercise, but it is important to acknowledge the limitations of data availability and comparability. Take, for instance, the cases of Taiwan and Venezuela. Due to its unique political status, some international organizations do not include Taiwan in their datasets. This can create gaps in information and make direct comparisons with other countries challenging. Political and economic turmoil in Venezuela can lead to inconsistencies or unreliability in data collection and reporting.

We sourced the GDP per capita, the PPP conversion factor, GDP (LCU per international $), and GNI per capita (constant LCU) from the World Bank for 2023. We wanted to determine the relationships between the GSL Index and each of these economic factors by creating several scatter plots. Multiple versions of combinations of indices formed the GSL Index. The first developed GSL Index included all indices (see Appendix 1). The other developed GSL indices used nine or six indices (see Appendices 2 and 3). The results of the scatterplots presented comparable and, in some instances, identical perspectives or representations of the data. The findings provided support for the methodology used.

All charts examining the relationship between the Gini Coefficient Index, GNI per capita, and PPP and the GSL Index or subsets of leadership indices yielded low R-squared values, indicating a poor linear fit, while all charts examining the relationship between the GDP per capita and the GSL Index or subsets of leadership indices yielded high or moderately high R-squared values. Although a high R-squared value is usually most desirable, a low R-squared helps identify certain countries that may be extremely unordinary in an economic metric compared to other comparable nations; otherwise known as the influence of outliers. In particular, when examining the GNI per capita and PPP charts, the countries of Vietnam, Indonesia, and, to some extent, Chile have a large GNI per capita and PPP value compared to the other countries analyzed in this Element.

GNI per capita represents the ratio between the GNI and the midyear population. GNI is the sum of value added by all resident producers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not included in the valuation of output plus net receipts of primary income (compensation of employees and property income) from abroad and is represented by each country’s respective currency. PPP conversion factor represents the number of units of a country’s currency required to buy the same amounts of goods and services in the domestic market as the U.S. dollar would buy in the United States. A country with a large PPP conversion factor and a large GNI per capita with respect to each of the countries’ currencies indicates a weakened currency compared to the U.S. dollar. Both Vietnam and Indonesia have extremely high PPP and GNI per capita values compared to other countries in the analysis, indicating that both of these countries have very weak currencies compared to the U.S. dollar. A common reason for Vietnam’s and Indonesia’s depreciated currency is that Vietnam and Indonesia have large trade deficits mainly due to their reliance on importing more goods and raw materials compared to the country’s level of exports (GNI per capita [constant LCU] by country; Vietnam – PPP conversion factor; United States – Gini Coefficient Index).

Also, the Gini Coefficient Index measures the extent to which the distribution of income (or, in some cases, consumption expenditure) among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. A Gini Coefficient Index of 0 represents perfect equality, while an index of 100 implies perfect inequality. Even though there may not necessarily be any outliers for the Gini Coefficient Index, as the values must all be within the range of 0 to 100, a low R-squared reflects the complexity of the relationship between the Gini Coefficient Index and the GSL Index. Instead, the charts with the Gini Coefficient Index may help identify patterns about which regions have countries with consistent equitable economic performance. We can observe from the Gini Coefficient Index charts that Asian countries consistently fall remarkably close to one another, while African countries are quite distant with respect to their Gini Coefficient value.

The GDP per capita charts show large R-squared values, indicating that there is a strong positive linear relationship between GDP per capita and the GSL Index or any subset of indices. This indicates that the GSL Index performs similarly to the GDP per capita. Many of the indices used to create the GSL Index are economic measures that are affected by countries’ GDP per capita, but the difference concerns how the GSL Index considers multiple other metrics that GDP per capita does not include such as health, social, and equitable measures. Hence, a large variability of GDP per capita is explained solely by the GSL Index, and the variability of GDP per capita is explained by other metrics.

GDP and GSL Index

The critical implications drawn from the GDP per capita and GSL Index scatterplot are not to be overlooked. They can have a significant impact on the analysis and decision-making process. The most critical criteria are the outliers. Middle Eastern countries such as UAE and Saudi Arabia have an exceptionally large GDP per capita in correspondence with the GSL Index measure. In contrast, South American countries, including Chile and Argentina have smaller GDP per capita in relation to the developed GSL Index measure. Another noticeable characteristic of Figure 1 is that we can draw a “cone” shape with the countries. The cone shape indicates that countries that receive a lower GSL Index score from the developed methodology are relatively similar in GDP per capita, whereas countries with a higher GSL Index score have a wide dispersion of GDP per capita.

An explanation for this relationship could yield from the governance dynamics and economic policies within countries. Nations with lower GSL Index scores may exhibit more centralized or authoritarian governance structures, where economic opportunities and resources are often concentrated among a select few. This can result in a relatively uniform distribution of GDP per capita, as wealth tends to be controlled by a small elite. At the same time, most of the population experiences similar levels of economic well-being or deprivation. On the other hand, countries with higher GSL Index scores may embrace more decentralized or democratic governance models, fostering a broader spectrum of economic outcomes. Policies promoting entrepreneurship, innovation, and investment in such environments may lead to a wider dispersion of GDP per capita. While some regions or sectors may experience rapid economic growth and prosperity, others may lag due to factors such as infrastructure deficiencies, institutional weaknesses, or socioeconomic disparities.

Furthermore, the relationship between GSL Index scores and GDP per capita dispersion may also reflect the effectiveness of governance in fostering inclusive growth. Nations with strong leadership and effective institutions may be better equipped to implement policies that promote equitable economic development, thereby reducing disparities in income and wealth among their citizens. Conversely, weak or ineffective governance structures may exacerbate inequalities, leading to a wider gap between society’s wealthiest and poorest segments. Thus, the relationship between GSL Index scores and the dispersion of GDP per capita underscores the complex interplay between governance, economic policy, and socioeconomic outcomes within countries. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for policymakers and analysts seeking to address issues of inequality and promote sustainable development on both national and global scales.

Another important note is that the scatterplot of all the indices and six indices’ charts showing the relationship between GDP per capita and the GSL Index are remarkably similar, indicating that the method of using an average across the indices is an appropriate method to create the GSL Index. There is very little change between each point, showing consistency between six and thirteen indices. South American countries tend to have higher leadership metric scores and lower GDP per capita, while Middle Eastern countries tend to have higher leadership metric scores and higher GDP per capita. The other countries representing African and Asian regions have lower leadership scores and lower GDP per capita, once again supporting the finding that as countries yield lower leadership scores, their GDP per capita is consistently lower. Hence, we show there is a cluster of points within the chart. The six indices we selected are ones that we believe are highly influential on a country’s performance.

UAE and Saudi Arabia GDP Outliers

The high GDP per capita of the UAE and Saudi Arabia within the Global South are primarily driven by their vast oil reserves, strategic locations, and initiative-taking economic diversification efforts. However, this economic prosperity comes with challenges related to income inequality and dependence on a finite resource. The high GDP per capita of the UAE and Saudi Arabia compared to other countries in the Global South can be attributed to a confluence of factors: The UAE and Saudi Arabia possess vast oil and natural gas reserves. This has been a primary driver of their economic growth, generating significant export revenue and fueling rapid development. Furthermore, the UAE and Saudi Arabia benefit from their strategic location in the Persian Gulf, which serves as a crucial energy passage and grants them close access to significant customers and well-established commercial channels. By strategically placing themselves, they are able to efficiently use their resources and attract international investment.

While oil and gas remain crucial, both countries have recognized the need for economic diversification. The UAE has established itself as a financial center, a hub for tourism and logistics, and is investing heavily in renewable energy. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have embarked on ambitious national transformation plans known as Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030. These initiatives go beyond mere economic diversification and represent a significant shift in leadership style. These visions represent comprehensive roadmaps to foster sustainable development, economic diversification, and societal advancement.

Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030, launched in 2016, serves as a blueprint for transitioning the kingdom’s economy away from its heavy reliance on oil revenue toward a more diversified, knowledge-based economy. Central to this vision is promoting private sector growth, investment in human capital development, and enhancing non-oil sectors such as tourism, entertainment, and technology. Through initiatives like NEOM, the Red Sea Project, and the development of a vibrant cultural sector, Saudi Arabia aims to create new opportunities for employment, entrepreneurship, and innovation while fostering a more open and dynamic society. Similarly, the UAE’s Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030 , launched in 2021, underscores the nation’s commitment to building a competitive and knowledge-based economy driven by innovation, sustainability, and social cohesion. Emphasizing the principles of economic diversification, technological advancement, and environmental stewardship, the UAE seeks to position itself as a global hub for innovation, entrepreneurship, and sustainable development. Initiatives such as the Mars Mission, the Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030, and the Dubai Clean Energy Strategy exemplify the UAE’s initiative-taking approach toward embracing emerging technologies, fostering talent, and mitigating environmental challenges.

The pursuit of Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030 reflects a departure from traditional leadership models characterized by dependency on oil revenue and centralized decision-making toward more inclusive, forward-thinking approaches. Both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have demonstrated a willingness to embrace innovation, empower their citizens, and engage with global partners to drive sustainable growth and prosperity. These visions signal a shift toward collaborative leadership, whereby governments, private sector entities, and civil society work hand in hand to achieve common goals. By fostering partnerships with international corporations, academic institutions, and technology pioneers, Saudi Arabia and the UAE seek to leverage global expertise and resources to accelerate their economic transformation. Additionally, Abu Dhabi Economic Vision 2030 is committed to empowering youth and women as catalysts for change and progress. Through investments in education, training, and entrepreneurship, both nations aim to unlock the full potential of their human capital and create a more inclusive and diversified workforce. Furthermore, these visions reflect a long-term strategic outlook emphasizing resilience, adaptability, and future readiness. By investing in renewable energy, innovative technology, and innovation sectors, Saudi Arabia and the UAE are positioning themselves to thrive in a rapidly evolving global landscape characterized by disruptive technologies, climate change, and geopolitical shifts.

Both the UAE and Saudi Arabia have used their oil wealth to invest heavily in infrastructure development, creating modern transportation networks, logistics facilities, and special economic zones. Additionally, both countries have established sizeable sovereign wealth funds, essentially state-owned investment funds fueled by oil revenue. These funds invest in domestic infrastructure projects and international ventures.

Foreign investment has become a cornerstone of Saudi Arabia’s economic diversification strategy. Saudi Arabia’s economic diversification strategy is based on foreign investment, akin to a new leadership model. This strategy strategically attracts capital and expertise, fostering the growth of a dynamic and diverse industrial landscape, demonstrating a new leadership type. Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 aims to reduce its dependence on oil and build a robust, knowledge-based economy. Foreign investment plays a crucial role in achieving this vision, with Saudi Arabia attracting significant investments in key infrastructure sectors like transportation, energy, and telecommunications. This influx of foreign capital has facilitated the development of diverse industries beyond oil and gas, such as automotive and aerospace. Investments in high-speed internet and data centers are paving the way for a flourishing tech industry. A futuristic mega-city project, NEOM represents a bold leadership vision spearheaded by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The name “NEOM” is a combination of Ancient Greek prefix “NEO” signifying “new” and ‘M’ indicating Mostaqbal, an Arabic term denoting “future.” Given that many people believe the project is too ambitious, there is a chance that it will never be completely executed. The project aims to build a city from the ground up, nestled amidst the breathtaking landscapes of northwest Saudi Arabia, focusing on sustainability, technological integration, and a thriving knowledge-based economy. The city will be powered by 100 percent renewable energy, with plans for a futuristic transportation system using autonomous vehicles and high-speed rail.

With a strong focus on prioritizing a superior standard of living, NEOM is focused on providing top-tier educational, healthcare, and recreational amenities. Despite facing challenges like attracting talent and navigating complex logistics, it represents a paradigm shift for Saudi Arabia. The success of NEOM will not only transform Saudi Arabia’s industrial landscape but potentially set a precedent for sustainable and technologically advanced urban development on a global scale.

It is important to note that a high GDP per capita only sometimes translates to widespread prosperity. Both countries, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, grapple with income inequality, with a sizable portion of the wealth concentrated in the hands of a small elite. Their economies are still heavily reliant on oil, making them less resilient and vulnerable to fluctuations in global oil prices.

As the UAE and Saudi Arabia’s exceptional GDP per capita within the Global South are primarily driven by their vast oil and gas reserves, strategic location, and proactive efforts toward economic diversification, their reliance on natural resources and the need to address income inequality remain ongoing challenges. As outliers in the Global South due to their rich natural resources, strategic location, business-friendly policies, and government investment, they face the challenge of diversifying their economies and ensuring equitable distribution of wealth. Their experiences offer valuable insights for other developing nations seeking to accelerate economic growth and achieve sustainable development.

South America GDP Per Capita Outliers

In regards to South America, countries in this region have a high GSL Index and a low GDP per capita. While the region boasts a high GSL Index, signifying strong leadership qualities, its GDP per capita remains relatively low. This might be because the leadership prioritizes social stability and long-term economic development through investments in education and infrastructure. Additionally, external factors like a global recession could be affecting the region’s economic performance. This means that South America falls below a line where GDP per capita is lower on a scatter plot with the GSL Index on the vertical axis and GDP per capita on the horizontal axis. In contrast, countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE sit comfortably above this line, enjoying both a high GSL Index and a high GDP per capita.

The data becomes more dispersed as we move further up the GSL Index scale (higher leadership). This suggests that high-performing leadership styles vary more significantly than low-performing ones. Conversely, countries on the lower end of the GSL Index spectrum tend to be consistently clustered together, indicating a need for more differentiation in their leadership approaches. Interestingly, for countries with a high GSL Index, there is a much wider spread in terms of GDP per capita. This implies that strong leadership only sometimes guarantees a high GDP per capita. Other factors like resource allocation, infrastructure, or economic policies might influence a country’s economic success.

Brazil, Chile, and Argentina have higher GDP per capita than many African and Asian countries due to a combination of historical factors, institutional differences, and economic strategies. Historically, these South American countries benefited from European colonization, which transferred knowledge, technology, and institutions that laid the groundwork for economic development. These countries also possess valuable natural resources, such as agricultural land, minerals, and oil reserves, which generate significant income and fuel economic growth through resource exports.

South America’s leadership landscape has been shaped by various leadership styles, from authoritarian dictatorships to charismatic leaders who championed social change. Former leaders, often charismatic and populist, built strong followings based on promises of social justice and economic prosperity. However, the tensions between authoritarian control and inspirational change continue to play out in contemporary South America. The historical focus on obedience may sometimes result in a dearth of entrepreneurial spirit, a prevalent rentier model (characterized by seeking rents and a landlord mindset), or a deep unwillingness to question the existing state of affairs. At the same time, the need for transformative leadership can contribute to dissatisfaction with democratic processes. To move forward, South America must learn from its past leadership styles and strive instead for a future-oriented leadership, a different style of leadership, where leaders empower citizens, foster participation, and prioritize long-term development over short-term charisma. This requires nurturing strong democratic institutions, promoting open dialogue, and encouraging critical thinking. By fostering a culture of responsible leadership and active citizenship, South America can move beyond the shadows of its past and forge a future built on collaboration and shared prosperity.

Institutionally, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina have generally had more stable governments compared to many African and Asian nations. The current new stability, if properly managed/implemented, might foster an environment conducive to long-term economic planning and investment. Additionally, these countries need to increase their investment in infrastructure development, such as transportation networks, communication systems, and energy grids, which facilitate trade, the movement of goods and people, and economic activity.

Economically, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina have undergone periods of industrialization, diversifying their economies beyond resource extraction and fostering domestic manufacturing. They have also embraced trade liberalization policies, opening their economies to international trade and foreign investment, boosting exports, technology access, and overall economic activity.

However, it is important to recognize that while having a greater GDP per capita, these countries still have significant economic inequality and their economies are susceptible to changes in global commodity prices. South American countries enjoy some advantages, yet they also face enduring hurdles. Undoubtedly, their GDP per capita is low when compared to that of developed nations. The phenomenon of economic development is intricate, and this is part of the growing pains.

If we consider the GSL Index as a test that measures leadership effectiveness, the GDP per capita stays constant (the vertical axis does not change), while the GSL Index scores vary (the horizontal axis changes). This means that countries are primarily affected horizontally based on their leadership performance rather than vertically in terms of economic output. We will likely see a more complex picture if we factor in GDP per capita changes (vertical movement). Countries with consistently high performance across various indices (beyond just the GSL Index) would likely diverge even more significantly, indicating their exceptional leadership across multiple aspects. For example, consider Chile and Argentina. While these two countries might be geographically close, their GSL Index scores could place them further apart on the scatter plot, suggesting Chile demonstrates stronger leadership qualities across various dimensions than Argentina. Additionally, both might outperform other South American countries in terms of the GSL Index, even though their GDP per capita might differ.

As a result, this approach emphasizes the complicated relationship between leadership and economic progress. While strong leadership is essential, it is just one piece of the puzzle. Effective policies and resource management also play a crucial role in driving a country’s economic success. The methodology and analysis presented in the Element demonstrate that leadership and economic wealth are not necessarily linked, and strong leadership can exist even in countries with lower GDP per capita. Furthermore, the GSL Index allows for isolating the impact of leadership on a country’s position, while some countries consistently outperform others in leadership metrics.

Nigeria GDP Outlier

Nigeria is unique in Africa’s economic scene, characterized by a high GDP per capita. However, it is difficult to translate this GDP per capita growth into widespread prosperity for its population. Nigeria experiences impressive economic growth due to its abundant natural resources, specifically oil and gas, which contribute to its wealth. Nigeria’s GDP per capita has been greatly enhanced by its abundant natural resources, propelling it to become the largest economy in Africa based on nominal GDP per capita (World Bank, 2024).

Nigeria is facing major challenges related to economic leadership. First, there is a vast inequality in wealth distribution. Despite the abundance of oil wealth, prosperity has not been evenly distributed. A considerable number of individuals in Nigeria struggle to meet the national poverty line. Secondly, income inequality is a significant challenge encountered by numerous resource-rich countries. Additionally, infrastructure plays a crucial role in nations’ economic development. Additionally, Nigeria’s infrastructure poses significant challenges in key sectors such as transportation and power generation. The lack of economic diversification and development in non-oil sectors is a significant obstacle to Nigeria’s progress.

While corruption remains a major obstacle that cannot be overlooked, Nigeria’s ranking on Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index has consistently been low, which has a negative impact on foreign investment and poses obstacles to economic growth. As a result, the Nigerian government has come to acknowledge the drawbacks of depending solely on oil and is taking steps to broaden the country’s economic base and the importance of sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and information technology.

Another aspect that should not be neglected is that Nigeria’s population is experiencing rapid growth from 229.2 million in 2024 to 377 million by 2050 (IMF, 2024) which creates a range of challenges and opportunities. The situation in Nigeria results in a significant expansion of the labor force, which in turn puts a strain on resources and adds pressure to social services. The ability to successfully diversify the economy will play a crucial role in absorbing the expanding workforce.

Nigeria’s economy is expected to grow by 3.1% in 2024, reflecting its robust economic performance (IMF), and can be largely attributed to its abundant natural resources and leadership approach. Nevertheless, Nigeria faces obstacles such as income inequality, infrastructure limitations, and corruption that impede its ability to transform wealth into broad-based economic development.

Therefore, Nigeria, Africa’s largest economy and most populous country has the potential to become an economic leader in Africa and the Global South. However, achieving this requires addressing major issues and implementing significant changes. Key strategies in addition to a more powerful, forward-thinking leadership role, include economic restructuring and diversification, infrastructure development, human capital investment, and regional integration.

Additionally, Nigeria’s economy is sensitive to oil price fluctuations, making diversification beyond oil essential. The government should promote development in non-oil industries like agriculture, manufacturing, and information technology to create employment, promote innovation, and provide long-term income streams. Investing in dependable infrastructure, such as power grids, transportation networks, and communication systems, can lower manufacturing costs, boost commerce, and attract international investment. Public–private partnerships can finance these projects.

Also, investing in human capital is essential for a prosperous economy in Nigeria. Nigeria should emphasize excellence in education at all levels and invest in healthcare to increase the well-being of its people. The African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) entered into force in May 2019, offers Nigeria a unique opportunity to broaden its regional economic footprint. Likewise, addressing security concerns is crucial for fostering economic progress.

Nigeria has significant prospects for economic progress due to the digital revolution. By investing in digital infrastructure, promoting tech entrepreneurship, and fostering an inventive culture, Nigeria may effectively allocate resources to develop its human capital, which is crucial for a thriving economy.

PPP and GSL Index

The PPP Index compares the cost of living between different countries. It aims to show how much a basket of goods would cost in various locations. However, specific implications and outcomes must be considered when interpreting the PPP Index.

One implication is that high-income inequality within a country can lead to PPP Index outliers. For example, a country with significant income disparity may have a high average income, but most of the population may not enjoy that standard of living. This can make the PPP seem higher than the actual living experience for most people. An example is the UAE, where a large skilled expatriate workforce earns high salaries, but the unskilled foreign workers have a different income level.

Another implication is that the PPP Index may only capture some essential expenses. For instance, the PPP Index may only partially reflect costs such as housing or healthcare significantly higher than average in a particular country. This can lead to underestimating the genuine cost of living in a country, particularly for those expenses not fully captured by the PPP Index. For example, the PPP calculation may not adequately account for housing and healthcare costs, which can vary widely from one location to another. As a result, individuals or households in areas with disproportionately high expenses for these necessities may find their purchasing power diminished relative to what the PPP suggests. This discrepancy can exacerbate income inequality by disproportionately affecting lower-income groups who must allocate a larger portion of their earnings toward these essential but unaccounted-for expenses. Furthermore, underestimating the actual cost of living can distort economic analyses and policy decisions, potentially leading to inadequate resource allocation or ineffective interventions addressing socioeconomic disparities.

Vietnam and Indonesia PPP Outliers

Vietnam and Indonesia are outliers in the PPP Index within the South America region of the Global South. These include rapid economic growth, a young and growing workforce population, a focus on manufacturing, and strategic government policies. Both countries have experienced significant economic growth. Indonesia’s gross domestic product growth is forecast to average 5.1 percent per year from 2024 to 2026, and Vietnam’s economic growth is accelerating and could meet or exceed the government’s 6.5 percent target this year, according to Planning and Investment Minister Nguyen Chi Dung (World Bank, 2024). The rise in GDP per capita in these two Asian nations leads to an upsurge in earnings and consumer expenditure. The growth of the young labor force, as said, is a key component that contributes to the rise of economic productivity and an increased ability for production and consumption. Consequently, Vietnam and Indonesia have become major manufacturing hubs, attracting foreign investment and generating exports.

The presence of a strategic leadership vision had a significant impact on both of these nations. The implementation of strategic government policies, which focus on boosting foreign direct investment, infrastructure development, and export-oriented sectors, has been essential in driving economic growth. However, it is important to acknowledge income inequality and regional variations within these countries. Additionally, a comparison with other developing nations reveals the role of factors like resource dependence and political stability in shaping overall purchasing power. Vietnam and Indonesia’s diversified economies and relative political stability have contributed to their outlier status in the PPP Index within the Global South.

Chile and UAE PPP Outliers

Due to several factors, Chile and the UAE may be outliers in the PPP Index. In the case of Chile, high-income inequality and a high cost of living in major cities, such as Santiago, contribute to the deviation from the expected correlation between income and cost of living. In the UAE, a large expatriate population earning high salaries and the high cost of non-tradable goods, such as transportation and utilities, contribute to the outlier status compared to other countries. The high cost of non-tradable goods and services, such as transportation or utilities in the UAE, can also contribute to the outlier status. Government subsidies on essential goods can artificially lower the cost of living as measured by the PPP, making the countries appear cheaper than their typical market value. Further research can include analyzing the Gini Coefficient Index to measure income inequality, examining cost of living reports specific to major cities, and evaluating the composition of the PPP basket, and how it may not capture certain local realities.

Nigeria PPP Outlier

Nigeria is a notable exception in the developing world when it comes to PPP and its role in the global economy, and we can observe significant differences in PPP and uneven development. Nigeria has a significant advantage in terms of PPP, which indicates that its citizens can obtain more value for their money than developed nations. The reason behind this is the presence of a sizable number of young population and a comparatively affordable cost of living (World Bank, 2023). However, the benefits of PPP programs have not translated into widespread prosperity or equitable distribution of wealth. The disparity in income levels is striking, as a considerable segment of the population resides below the poverty threshold. Nigeria’s economy has shown varied performance due to its heavy reliance on oil exports and the unpredictable fluctuations in oil prices. Despite attempts to diversify the economy, consistent outcomes have not been achieved, which may indicate they need a more strategically oriented leadership type vision.

Urbanization has become a pressing issue as cities continue to grow at an alarming rate, (for example, Lagos is one of the largest and fastest growing mega-cities in Africa at nearing 16 million: population’s annual average growth rate is 3.2 percent, above the national growth rate of 2.6 percent, and projected to become the world’s most populous city by 2100, with 88.3 million) (World Bank, 2023), placing immense strain on resources and exacerbating the already significant wealth disparity between different socioeconomic groups. The inadequate state of transportation and power grids hinders business operations and hampers productivity, and security issues have a significant impact (Qureshi, Reference Qureshi2023).

Through strategic measures and leveraging its unique advantages, Nigeria could emerge as a prominent economic powerhouse in the Global South; nevertheless, moving ahead necessitates bold leadership, consistent dedication, and the implementation of well-thought-out policies to achieve sustainable growth. It is important to prioritize the development of non-oil sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and services. Additionally, investing in infrastructure upgrades can enhance connectivity and stimulate investment. Establishing stability is also crucial for attracting investment and promoting economic activity.

Gini Coefficient and GSL Index

The Gini Coefficient Index is a measure of income inequality within a population. It quantifies the extent to which the distribution of income or wealth among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution. The coefficient is represented by a number between 0 and 1, where 0 represents perfect equality (everyone has the same income) and one represents perfect inequality (one person has all the income, while everyone else has none).

The Gini Coefficient is calculated based on income or wealth data from a population, and it does not directly measure GDP per capita or PPP. However, it is often used alongside these economic indicators to provide insights into a country’s wealth or income distribution. A higher Gini Coefficient Index suggests greater income inequality, which can have social and economic implications for a society.

There could be several reasons why Nigeria, Chile, UAE, South Africa, and Brazil might be outliers in terms of the Gini Coefficient Index. In the case of Nigeria, the high Gini coefficient is attributed to factors such as corruption, unequal access to resources, regional disparities in development, and dependence on oil revenue. This has resulted in a large gap between the rich and the poor, with a small percentage of the population controlling a significant share of the wealth. In Chile, the high Gini coefficient may result from factors such as the privatization of social services, the historical legacy of dictatorship, and neoliberal economic policies. This has led to unequal access to quality services based on socioeconomic status and entrenched disparities in wealth and opportunity. The UAE’s Gini coefficient reflects the substantial income disparities between the local Emirati population and the large expatriate workforce. The country’s reliance on oil revenue has led to a widening wealth gap between citizens and noncitizens and a reliance on low-wage migrant labor. South Africa’s high Gini coefficient is a result of its history of apartheid and colonialism. Despite efforts to address inequality through policies such as Black economic empowerment, racial disparities in wealth and access to opportunities persist. Factors such as land ownership patterns, educational inequalities, and structural barriers contribute to the country’s high Gini coefficient.

In Brazil, historical factors such as colonialism, slavery, and land concentration have contributed to enduring socioeconomic disparities. Economic policies, limited access to education and healthcare for marginalized populations, and urbanization have also perpetuated inequality. Land inequality and a large informal sector workforce further contribute to Brazil’s high Gini coefficient.

GNI per Capita and GSL Index

The GNI per capita Index reflects a nation’s total income, considering income earned by its residents domestically and abroad. This makes it a broader measure of economic well-being compared to the GDP per capita, which only focuses on economic activity within a country’s borders.

No Longer Bottom of the Pyramid

Another point of progress and a departure from the Global North-South line based on GDP per capita established by former German Chancellor Willy Brandt in 1980, C.K. Prahalad coined the phrase “Bottom of the Pyramid” (BoP), and its significance to the Global South’s potential is critical (Prahalad & Hart, Reference Prahalad and Hart1999). We argue that the massive number of low-income workers in the Global South provides an immense, untapped market potential. The narrative of people experiencing poverty as just receivers of help is now being reframed, and instead, the world needs to refer to the Global South as potential customers, producers, and economic drivers. This also is a time for companies to develop new goods and services to meet the BoP population’s wants and buying power of an untapped market with massive economic and other human capital potential. However, it is important to note the BoP challenges, such as issues with affordability, accessibility, and cultural acceptance of new products and services. With its vast and expanding population, the Global South has the potential for a substantial market with a drive toward economic development. Leadership is vital in realizing and adapting this positive economic outlook, and could encourage enterprises to create inclusive business models for the mutual benefit of those enterprises and the BoP population. Businesses that regard the BoP as a market opportunity rather than a burden may help drive economic growth and development in these areas.

The Global South seems to be at the forefront of promising economic growth and social progress. This progress is not without its challenges. Hence, effective leadership is crucial and urgent in navigating these complexities as we explore in this Element. Some other examples of leadership, as well as their shortcomings, can be referenced. For instance, the leadership of Singapore’s first Prime Minister, the late Lee Kuan Yew, was instrumental in the country’s ascent as a global innovation hub. Similarly, under President Paul Kagame’s leadership, Rwanda has made significant economic development and poverty reduction strides. The interplay between this Element’s leadership approach and a country’s GDP and economic growth is profound. Therefore, leadership plays a crucial role in shaping a nation’s economic trajectory through various political and economic processes.

As previously discussed, the Global South is positioned to have a substantial impact on global economic leadership and international development. The Global South, including emerging and growing markets in Asia, Africa, and South America, is propelling innovation and generating new opportunities for the trade of products and services. Despite variations in levels of commitment and national limitations, these areas are promoting policies for success. Moreover, they are actively formulating plans to tackle global issues such as climate change, sustainable development, and fair economic growth. They advocate for policies prioritizing social equity, environmental sustainability, and long-term economic stability. The Global South also fosters SSC, where countries share knowledge, resources, and best practices to tackle common issues and leverage collective strengths. This collaborative approach enhances their ability to influence global economic governance and ensures their perspectives are reflected in international decision-making processes. As these countries grow, they will become strong voices and influencers in shaping the future of the global economy and driving strategic initiatives benefiting not only their regions but the world at large.

Factors such as resource abundance, growing domestic markets, and investment in infrastructure and technology are fueling the economic prospective rise of the Global South. This shift in economic power could lead to a renegotiation of global trade deals, with increased SSC and pressure on established economies to offer fairer terms. Additionally, the rise of the Global South could challenge the current U.S.-centric world order, leading to a multipolar system and demanding more excellent representation in international institutions. However, there are challenges and uncertainties, including the need for significant capital investment, political instability and corruption, and the impact of climate change. Overall, the rise of the Global South presents both opportunities and challenges for companies that should consider market diversification, building local partnerships, focusing on sustainability, investing in infrastructure, and building a strong employer brand to thrive in this economic shift.

This Element launches a new concept of leadership that encompasses policymaking, institutional quality, investment in human capital, infrastructure development, promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship, external relations and trade policies, management of economic shocks, and long-term planning and vision. Effective leadership can foster an environment conducive to economic growth, while poor leadership can hinder progress and exacerbate socioeconomic challenges. The positive impacts of robust leadership on a nation’s future opportunities include the implementation of favorable economic policies, the maintenance of stability and certainty, the development of human capital, and the increase of investor confidence. Strong and effective leadership is essential for promoting economic growth. Economic expertise, vision, strategic thinking, effective decision-making, and adaptability are key qualities for leaders to drive growth and success. Such leaders can create an advantageous environment that is favorable to a broader economy by cultivating these traits. However, it is essential to consider nuances such as leadership style, the balance between short-term gains and long-term sustainability, and external factors that may influence economic growth. Leadership is one of many factors that affect a country’s economic development, and its influence in the global community, while it can significantly impact GDP, is not a guaranteed recipe for success although a good starting point. The success of developing countries hinges on strong and capable leadership that instills a sense of responsibility and collective consensus among the population. This emphasizes the need for leaders who can inspire accountability and promote a culture of progress in the Global South.

Complexity and Changing Dynamics

The Element’s approach aims to inspire leaders within the Global South, recognizing the complexity of the global order being defined by rising powers from the Global South. Russia, for example, located in the Northern Hemisphere, is an emerging global influencer with a complex history that challenges the established world order. Despite its high GDP, Russia still faces significant disparities in wealth distribution, classifying it as an upper-middle-income region. This uneven development reflects individuals’ challenges in regions beyond traditional power centers. Russia’s economic strength, evident through its military power and abundant natural resources, gives it a relative advantage over many countries in the Global South. Despite economic inequality, Russia’s overall development indicators, such as the HDI, surpass those of many other regions.

These days, Russia’s position is complex and cannot be easily categorized. It aims to bring together different geographical areas, presenting itself as an alternative leader for countries outside traditional power centers. Russia’s future relationship with other countries depends on various factors, such as the resolution of the Ukraine conflict, its economic direction, and its ability to establish itself as an alternative to Western influence. To fully comprehend Russia’s position in the global order, one must consider factors beyond mere geography, including its historical legacy, economic standing, and current political goals within the Global South. Russia’s relationship with regions beyond traditional power centers is subject to change and should be closely monitored as the global situation develops.

U.S. – China and the Balance of Power

Asia is the world’s most strategically important region, home to over half the population and six of the world’s twenty-five largest economies. It has been a driving force in global growth, accounting for over 70 percent of the increase in global GDP over the last decade. China has contributed 31 percent to this growth. Asia also hosts 19 of the top 100 universities and 10 of the 25 countries with the most patents in 2021. To remain the most powerful country, the U.S. must tap into Asia and prevent China from dominating it (Mallick, Reference Mallick2024).

Chinese universities have surpassed the top ten spots in a global science ranking, largely due to a shift in data underlying rankings. The Leiden University Center for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) group issued new university rankings that add open-data sources to the traditional curated list of elite journals. These results show that the world has turned upside down in terms of university rankings, with China’s position being upended. China’s rapid progress in science and technology, driven by investments in research and university strength, has alarmed the U.S. and other nations. Concerns are mounting that the U.S. may be losing its competitive advantage in the technology sector to an assertive rival, with potential implications for national security, economic standing, and global influence. The new rankings will likely raise even more alarm. Chinese researchers and their sponsoring institutions place a huge premium on publishing in international journals, even those hosted by questionable publishers. Efforts are underway to enhance quality, and government payments to researchers for articles in ranked journals are being unsettled (Wagner, Reference Wagner2024).

The Economist (2024) states that the U.S. focus on hindering China’s scientific progress is misguided. The pursuit of scholarly and scientific advancement is a key characteristic of global power in the 21st century. Both the U.S. and China invest heavily in research and development, but the current U.S. strategy of hindering China’s progress through sanctions is likely to be a self-defeating endeavor. A more nuanced approach may be necessary, considering the potential benefits of collaboration with China on mutually beneficial scholarly and scientific projects. In line with the Economist, there is a leadership style that relies on tariffs and sanctions to impede and halt a country’s technological progress. However, its effectiveness is debatable. The introduction of tariffs and sanctions raises ethical concerns, albeit their effectiveness is uncertain. The Economist posits that while tariffs and sanctions may be a morally justifiable method to impede a nation’s technological advancement, they may not be the most efficacious means to restrain China’s scientific growth. Sanctions alone are insufficient in restraining China’s scientific progress, since they may unintentionally encourage China to develop self-reliant capabilities, thus diminishing U.S. influence in the future. Collaboration on scientific research offers a compelling alternative, as joint efforts in areas like medicine, clean energy, and space exploration could lead to faster breakthroughs. International information and resource sharing has the capacity to accelerate scientific progress, perhaps resulting in the discovery of solutions to global challenges that would be beyond the capabilities of any one country. Refusing to do so may result in an accelerated competition and probable spillover into additional sectors.

Despite this approach, the U.S. must continue to pursue its own scientific innovation through increased investments in research and development. Attracting top scientific minds and fostering an environment that encourages groundbreaking ideas remain key elements in this pursuit. By reevaluating its strategy and prioritizing both domestic scholarly advancements and selective collaborations with China, the U.S. can ensure continued leadership in the global scientific arena while reaping the benefits of collaborative solutions to humanity’s most pressing challenges.

The U.S. also faces challenges in maintaining global leadership due to conflicts in Israel-Gaza and Russia-Ukraine, which have led to a perception of the U.S. as a non-neutral peace broker, have strained U.S. resources and diverted focus from other global issues. China’s rise, through initiatives like the BRI, is the most significant challenge to U.S. global leadership.

The old rules-based international order is no longer effective in today’s complex world, with traditional alliances and institutions struggling to address contemporary challenges such as climate change, cyber threats, economic inequality, and geopolitical tensions. To maintain global stability and progress, leaders must adopt innovative approaches that go beyond outdated frameworks. The current landscape is characterized by a diverse array of state and non-state actors, each with their own interests and agendas. Effective leadership requires a nuanced understanding of regional dynamics, a willingness to engage in multilateral and unconventional diplomacy, and the ability to foster cooperative relationships across a broad spectrum of stakeholders. The Element asserts that while the old international order’s remnants still exist, they are insufficient for addressing the complexities of today’s world. It calls for a new leadership approach that is adaptable, inclusive, and forward-thinking, capable of steering the global community through the uncertain and rapidly evolving landscape of the 21st century.

However, core institutions such as the UN Security Council and the World Trade Organization are tied in knots due to disagreements among their members. Russia is committed to disrupting U.S.-fortified norms. China is committed to building its own alternative order. In terms of trade and industrial policy, even Washington is moving away from the core tenets of post–Cold War globalization. Regional powers such as Brazil, India, Türkiye, and the Gulf states select which partner to connect with based on the specific interest or issue at hand. Even the current high-water mark for multilateral action and support for Ukraine in its fight against Russia – remains a largely Western initiative. As the old order unravels, these overlapping blocs are competing over what will replace it. Washington needs to prioritize investment, technology, and clean energy to strengthen relationships with the Global South. To build a reservoir of goodwill, U.S. leadership must listen to diverse voices from around the world it faces internationally and embracing an agenda that is repositioning the U.S. for a changing world by focusing on its democracy and economy, rebooting alliances in Europe and Asia, and embracing an agenda that resonates with more governments and people (Rhodes, Reference Rhodes2024).

Russia’s strategic moves, while not as pervasive as China’s, are strategically enhancing its presence in the Middle East and other regions. Regional powers such as Iran, Türkiye, and Saudi Arabia are also recalibrating their strategies in response to the shifting dynamics.

The Global South is undergoing considerable economic and political restructuring. As the U.S. focuses on conflicts and regional instabilities, China’s investments and Russia’s military partnerships are creating new alliances and dependencies. Potential outcomes may diminish the influence of the U.S. and the so-called West, increase multipolarity, and economic shifts toward the Global South. To retain its leadership role, the U.S. must adapt its strategies and strengthen its alliances, balancing immediate conflict management with long-term global engagement.

Another point of contention according to a recent analysis by the London School of Economics and Political Science (2024), the COVID-19 pandemic, tensions between the U.S. and China, and conflicts in the Middle East have raised concerns about the reliability of global supply chains and the future of globalization. A study using data from the global value chains (GVCs) Indicators database examines the evolution of globalization from 2000 to 2021, focusing on GVCs and the role of China. The study highlights the importance of measuring trade on a value-added basis, as it provides a more accurate picture of world trade compared to gross trade statistics. Value-added measurements capture the contribution of each country’s producers throughout the production process, including intermediate goods traded across multiple stages.

Frayer (Reference Frayer2024) addresses three key questions: the extent of supply chain decoupling between North America and China, the increase in globalization or “nearshoring,” and the role of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) in shaping production linkages and GVCs. The results show that there was no measurable decoupling between North America and China in terms of indirect value-added production linkages. While direct trade between the U.S. and China has decreased, indirect linkages have grown, suggesting that trade in final goods is being redirected through third-party nations. The study also finds no evidence, so far, of a significant global trend toward a strong reshoring production during the analyzed period.

In terms of FTAs, the analysis stresses their quantitative significance in explaining the expansion of indirect links across nations. The impact of FTAs on GVC linkages varies across regions and specific agreements, and FTAs should still be seen as valuable tools for strengthening bonds with trading partners in global supply chains. It also suggests that assertions of deglobalization are overstated since both direct and indirect links supporting the production of goods and services have not decreased globally. The trade in services and products continue to expand, demonstrating that globalization is still occurring. Consequently, the U.S. may want to consider and give priority to the establishment of new trade agreements with allies in Asia and Europe in order to preserve its influence in the restructuring of GVCs and contribute to their long-term prosperity.

This brings attention to the matter at hand. Although there is no clear and unified leadership within this group, China has become a highly influential member, surpassing the influence of the U.S., China strategically targets vulnerable countries in need of infrastructure support and financing. However, China’s influence, both in terms of reach and intensity, and its conduct and political values, may potentially hinder its influence. Other emerging powers, such as India, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, and South Africa, also have claims to power within the Global South (The Economist, April 8, 2024). This dynamic landscape of the Global South, with its potential for growth and influence, should inspire hope and optimism.

The Prominence of the BRICS-Plus Bloc

After the fifteenth BRICS Summit in 2023, foreign policy analysts raised concerns that the bloc may be seeking to construct an alternate world order to challenge Western-led global governance. The group has diverged from the Western-led system through initiatives such as reducing reliance on the U.S. dollar and creating new institutions. In January 2024, the group welcomed new members – emphasizing the importance of diversified global leadership and a greater plurality of ideas. No doubt, the BRICS-Plus is evolving into a strategic entity dedicated to system-wide reforms, with the NDB and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement being discussed as alternatives to Western-dominated institutions like the World Bank and the IMF. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a China-led multilateral development bank, has a track record of nearly doubled membership since its founding in 2016 (Dai, Reference Dai2024).

This Element supports a new concept of leadership as a driving force for change, innovation, and inclusive economic prosperity from the bottom up and middle out. It emphasizes empowering individuals and communities at the grassroots level, fostering growth that benefits all segments of society. The bloc’s strategies might include creating opportunities for marginalized and underrepresented groups, promoting equitable access to resources, and ensuring fair distribution of economic gains across different socioeconomic groups. Prioritizing education, healthcare, and social services, the bloc aims to build a resilient and inclusive economy. It also encourages local entrepreneurship, supports small and medium-sized enterprises, and fosters innovation in underserved areas. This bottom-up and middle-out approach aims to harness the potential of every member, driving economic growth from within and creating a more just and inclusive society.

With the UN Sustainable Development Goals in peril and the World Bank undergoing major reforms, BRICS-Plus has an opportunity to step up with development funding and new initiatives. BRICS-Plus members are laboratories for digital and financial inclusion and innovation with rapidly evolving digital economies. These innovations are particularly relevant in the Global South, where many people live in internet poverty and are excluded from the formal financial system. However, BRICS-Plus has yet to effectively leverage the digital development expertise of its member states. BRICS-Plus member states should harness best practices from within the bloc and align their digital innovators with the World Bank’s acceleration efforts to advance inclusion among the three dozen countries seeking inspiration and new development opportunities. The BRICS-Plus is poised to persist in aligning with the existing system and advocating for specific changes when necessary (East Asia Forum, 2024).

We need to recognize the increasing importance of the BRICS-Plus bloc nations, which are gaining economic and political influence in the Global South. These economies have the potential to become the next major driver of global growth. According to the Berger report (Reference Berger2023), this potential originates from a number of factors. The Global South has abundant natural resources that are expected to be in high demand during the commodity supercycle from 2025 to 2030. Therefore, resource-rich countries seek to diversify their economies by developing downstream businesses beyond raw material exports. This diversity can lead to a more robust and resilient economy. Also, the transition to renewable energy may help developing economies move up the value chain and participate in higher-margin activities beyond exporting fossil fuels. However, the Berger report (2023) states that challenges must be solved before the entire Global South can fully achieve its economic potential, such as the current capital spending shortage. This lack of investment may result in a scarcity of critical commodities in the future. The Global South is becoming a significant economic and political power. While there are challenges to overcome, the area has the potential to become the next engine of global growth, particularly if it can leverage its resource richness, diversify its economies, and strategically position itself in the current energy revolution. As a result, the BRICS-Plus bloc aims to reform the current global system and create a more multipolar and democratic order, reducing the representation of Western ideas and leaders in global decision-making. Currently, the bloc relies on the Western-led global governance system. Despite being connected to the West, they also challenge it and are dedicated to challenging the global governance system. However, they are currently operating within its framework. To provide a compelling alternative to the current system, the bloc will need to demonstrate a distinctive vision for the Global South and expedite development progress.

The Global South is at the forefront of economic growth and social progress. This progress is not without its challenges, and effective leadership is crucial and urgent in navigating these complexities as we explore in this Element. The relationship between this Element’s leadership style and a country’s GDP and economic development is significant. Leadership can significantly shape a nation’s economic trajectory through various mechanisms, whether political or economic.

A new Concept of Leadership

This new concept of leadership elaborated in this Element encompasses policymaking, institutional quality, investment in human capital, infrastructure development, promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship, external relations and trade policies, management of economic shocks, and long-term planning and vision. Effective leadership can foster an environment conducive to economic growth, while poor leadership can hinder progress and exacerbate socioeconomic challenges. The positive impacts of robust leadership on national progress include the implementation of favorable economic policies, the maintenance of stability and certainty, the development of human capital, and the increase of investor confidence. Leadership traits such as economic expertise, vision and strategy, effective decision-making, and adaptability are crucial for economic growth. However, it is essential to consider nuances such as leadership style, the balance between short-term gains and long-term sustainability, and external factors that may influence economic growth. Leadership is one of many factors that influence a country’s economic development, and while it can significantly impact GDP, it is not a guaranteed recipe for success. This highlights the significance of competent leadership in the Global South, evoking a sense of accountability in our readers.

Although the significance of GDP for fostering economic growth is widely recognized, one has to also acknowledge the limitations of GDP as a measure of well-being (Dynan & Sheiner, 2018). The focus on production rather than distribution, the exclusion of nonmarket activities, and the failure to measure sustainability are some drawbacks of relying solely on GDP. Leaders in the Global South relying solely on GDP for policy decisions may overlook nuances in economic well-being. Understanding GDP’s limitations can lead to more informed policymaking addressing broader welfare aspects beyond GDP. Hence, there is a need for improved measurement practices that can provide leaders with more nuanced insights into economic conditions and welfare. The implications for leadership include the potential for misguided policies, a limited view of progress, and pressure to prioritize growth at any cost. Leaders prioritizing GDP growth may enact policies that intensify inequality or environmental damage or may fail to consider social indicators such as education or healthcare. Leaders may face pressure to boost GDP at any cost, even if it means compromising other aspects of their well-being.