
<rss version="0.91">
    <channel>
        <title>Latest Articles from BRICS Journal of Economics</title>
        <description>Latest 3 Articles from BRICS Journal of Economics</description>
        <link>https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2026 10:18:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Pensoft FeedCreator</generator>
        
	
		<item>
		    <title>Quantile Evidence on Institutional Quality and Economic Growth in a Fragile State: The Case of Afghanistan</title>
		    <link>https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/170868/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>BRICS Journal of Economics 7(1): 49-84</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/brics-econ.7.e170868</p>
					<p>Authors: Yang Jingjing, Shah Mir Mowahed, Mariam Reha</p>
					<p>Abstract: In recent decades, the role of institutions has become a central topic of discussion among scholars and policy makers. This study used time-series data from Afghanistan between 1996 and 2024 to gain new insights into the impact of political instability (POI), corruption (COR) and government effectiveness (GEF) on economic growth. The results of Quantile-on-Quantile Regression and Wavelet Quantile regression reveal that POI, COR, and GEF have adverse and statistically significant effects on GDP growth across all quantiles and over long-term time periods. Event analysis through the interrupted time series technique shows that the key political events, including the Civil War (CW), the First Round of the Taliban Regime (FRTR), U.S.-NATO interventions (USN), the Second Round of Taliban Regime (SRTR), and Regime Changes (RCH), have had a negative impact on Afghanistan’s GDP growth. The immediate impact of the Soviet Union’s war is estimated to be positive. At the same time, Afghanistan’s GDP experienced negative growth during SUW, CW, FRTR, and RCH, while during USN and SRTR, the GDP growth was positive. Based on these findings, the paper discusses possible policy implications.</p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/170868/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/170868/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/170868/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 6 Mar 2026 16:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Russia as a country of BRICS: Issue of identification</title>
		    <link>https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/98255/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>BRICS Journal of Economics 4(3): 321-333</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/brics-econ.4.e98255</p>
					<p>Authors: Petr Mozias</p>
					<p>Abstract: The approach of development economics has been rarely used in the studies on the BRICS research agenda. This article is an attempt to fill this gap. According to development economics, the appearance of the BRICS association is fully justifiable, because large emerging economies have much in common. Russia is the most advanced country among the BRICS, even though some years ago it fell into the group of laggards in terms of economic growth, together with Brazil and South Africa. It may be partly explained by those countries’ adherence to neoclassical recipes of economic policy. It is believed, however, that national economic interests of all the five countries could be more effectively served by a combination of further pro-market reforms with public interventions to correct the inevitable market failures. That is why, for the Russian comparative advantages to be fully realized, the country should rely not so much on trade liberalization as on coordination among the BRICS governments in their actions aimed at trade and investment promotion.</p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/98255/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/98255/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/98255/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
		<item>
		    <title>Return of Coal: A Short Visit or a Long Stay?</title>
		    <link>https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/94712/</link>
		    <description><![CDATA[
					<p>BRICS Journal of Economics 3(4): 209-229</p>
					<p>DOI: 10.3897/brics-econ.3.e94712</p>
					<p>Authors: Dzhanneta Medzhidova</p>
					<p>Abstract: Despite the existence of global targets to slow the pace of climate change, coal remains one of the most commonly used fuels that accounts for over 25% of the global energy supply and consumption. Multiple factors explain why coal is still widely used: its relatively low prices, availability in developing countries, low transportation costs and path dependence, i.e. the existing energy infrastructure. Coal consumption in developing (non-OECD) countries has been rising thanks to the processes in India and China but in 2021, however, it increased in the OECD countries as well. The uneven and often atypical post-COVID-19 recovery driven by manufacturing created disruptions in energy markets with high and volatile prices of coal’s main substitute - natural gas. The first in history and hence unexpected slowdown in the RES supply in 2021 added to the reversal of trends exactly at the time of the COP26 in Glasgow.        The goal of our study is to examine the coal markets in the new complex environment determined by both economic and political factors: high commodity prices, rising inflation, decelerating economic growth, and sanctions against exporters. In this paper we analyze the major trends before 2020, the current processes, and their implications for the future in the context of choice between economic development and energy transition including the issue of stranded assets and their possible reopening.</p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/94712/">HTML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/94712/download/xml/">XML</a></p>
					<p><a href="https://brics-econ.arphahub.com/article/94712/download/pdf/">PDF</a></p>
			]]></description>
		    <category>Research Article</category>
		    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2022 11:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	
	</channel>
</rss>
	