MAGAZINE ARCHIVE FOLLOW

LOGIN

What do all those acronyms stand for?

BY JOSHUA E. KEATING | MARCH/APRIL 2012

When Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill named the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, and

China "BRICs" in 2001, he didn't realize he was creating a major new geopolitical term, one that would even be

turned into a formal alliance by the countries themselves. (They capitalized the "S" when South Africa joined in

2010.) He also probably didn't realize he was creating a new cottage industry of acronyms. Here's a guide to

today's post-BRIC alphabet soup of global economics.

BASIC

Stands for: Brazil, South Africa, India, China

Created by: The countries themselves

Why: The BASIC group emerged at the 2009 Copenhagen climate-change conference to

present a counterproposal putting more obligations on rich countries to cut carbon emissions. Cooperation

SEARCH

continued into subsequent rounds of climate talks in Mexico and South Africa.

MIKT

Stands for: Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey

Created by: Jim O'Neill

Why: O'Neill didn't rest on his laurels following the hugely successful BRICs branding.

In early 2011, he unveiled MIKT, arguing that the term "emerging markets" to describe

these countries was simply no longer useful. It hasn't stuck quite as well.

NORCs

Stands for: Northern rim countries -- Canada, Russia, Scandinavia, and the northern

United States

Created by: University of California/Los Angeles geographer Laurence C. Smith

Why: Smith believes access to shipping lanes opened up by the melting of Arctic ice, combined with abundant

oil and natural gas resources, will make the Arctic countries the pivotal powers of the late 21st century.

PIGS

Stands for: Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain

Why: It's not clear who coined the unflattering nickname, which groups the worst-

performing European economies, but it's become widespread during the euro crisis and

is sometimes spelled "PIIGS" to include Ireland.

TIMBI

Stands for: Turkey, India, Mexico, Brazil, Indonesia

Created by: George Mason University professor Jack Goldstone

Why: Goldstone argued in a 2011 ForeignPolicy.com article that economic growth in

Russia and China would be hampered by shrinking working-aged populations, so India and Brazil should more

accurately be placed with countries that boast growing economies and populations.

Like 21 likes. Sign Up to see what your friends like.

Save big when you subscribe to FPSAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

SAJJAD HUSSAIN/AFP/Getty Images

OMAR TORRES/AFP/Getty Images

MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/AFP/Getty Images

MIGUEL RIOPA/AFP/Getty Images

Joshua E. Keating is an associate editor at Foreign Policy.

SHOW COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

FOLLOW US ON TWITTER | VISIT US ON FACEBOOK | FOLLOW US ON RSS | SUBSCRIBE TO FOREIGN POLICY

ABOUT FP | MEET THE STAFF | FOREIGN EDITIONS | REPRINT PERMISSIONS | ADVERTISING | WRITERS’ GUIDELINES | PRESS ROOM | WORK AT FP

SERVICES:SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES | ACADEMIC PROGRAM | FP ARCHIVE | REPRINT PERMISSIONS | FP REPORTS AND MERCHANDISE | SPECIAL REPORTS | BUY BACK ISSUES

PRIVACY POLICY | DISCLAIMER | CONTACT US

1899 L STREET NW, SUITE 550 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | PHONE: 202-728-7300 | FAX: 202-728-7342

FOREIGN POLICY IS PUBLISHED BY THE FP GROUP, A DIVISION OF THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY

ALL CONTENTS ©2012 THE FOREIGN POLICY GROUP, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Copyright of Foreign Policy is the property of Foreign Policy and its content may not be copied or emailed to

multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users

may print, download, or email articles for individual use.