This historical and interpretative essay aims to evaluate bilateral relationship, in its various dimensions, with positive accomplishments for both countries, especially in the economic area (trade and investments), notwithstanding the asymmetry of their interactions in almost all the economic, political, diplomatic and geopolitical domains. The focus is concentrated in the differing perspectives of their relationship during the last half century, with a pragmatic vision exhibited from the Chinese side, and a more optimistic, and idealist posture, emanating from the Brazilian side during the mandates of the Workers Party, under Lula. The implications of the BRICS dimension level, but also at the bilateral context, are examined, as well as the entrenched nationalism of economic and diplomatic elites.

This paper examines the pursuit of strategic autonomy by Brazil and China in the post-Cold War international system, particularly in relation to U.S. global hegemony. While both countries advocate for a multipolar order and seek to reform key institutions of global governance, their trajectories of international insertion, geopolitical ambitions, and structural capabilities differ markedly. China, as a systemic power and global manufacturing hub, employs geoeconomic instruments and selective institutional engagement to reshape the global order from within. Brazil, in contrast, operates primarily as a regional power, relying on coalition-building within the Global South and adopting flexible alignment strategies to preserve autonomy. Drawing from realist and geoeconomic theoretical frameworks, this paper explores how both states employ tools of "soft balancing" and "hedging" to navigate an increasingly competitive and fragmented world order. Particular attention is given to their behavior in multilateral forums (e.g., G20, WTO, UN) and their bilateral responses to geopolitical pressures from the United States. The paper argues that, although asymmetrical, Brazil and China’s approaches to strategic autonomy reveal broader trends in the Global South's repositioning under conditions of structural constraint and shifting power dynamics.

Who should be held accountable for socio-environmental tragedies caused by foreign investors? The multinational itself is one obvious answer, and the main debate drags on to which regime can better enforce its responsibilities. The host state has proved a limited alternative, given the lack of enforceability under circumstances of foreign investment dependence. Similarly, the multinational’s home state has little incentives to punish its own nationals for wrongful acts abroad. Industry self-regulation has displayed mixed results. Meanwhile, extreme disasters such as the 2019 dam collapse in Brumadinho (Brazil) keep happening at large. We propose a fresh look to the problem: instead of focusing on directly controlling and punishing multinationals, we discuss how markets that monopolize the demand for the products exported by those companies may develop tools to prevent such disasters. We discuss the Brumadinho case and how China may induce compliance by multinationals through import standards and safety production regulations.

This article analyzes the Brazil–China ETF Connect program as an innovative mechanism of financial integration and a qualitative deepening of bilateral economic relations between two major emerging economies. By enabling the reciprocal cross-listing of exchange-traded funds, the initiative allows investors in both countries to access each other’s equity markets through domestic financial infrastructure, reducing operational barriers and fostering regulatory cooperation. The article argues that ETF Connect represents more than a financial product innovation, constituting an institutional framework that embeds financial interdependence within broader South–South cooperation. It examines the program’s regulatory architecture, operational design, and risk management mechanisms, highlighting their role in enhancing transparency, market integrity, and investor protection. The analysis also emphasizes the portfolio diversification benefits for investors and situates ETF Connect within the evolving landscape of global financial integration, where emerging-market partnerships increasingly shape cross-border capital flows.

This article comparatively analyzes the energy transition and productive diversification trajectories of China and Brazil, emphasizing the role of the State in coordinating planning, regulation, financing, and innovation. It argues that the contemporary energy transition is not simply a technological substitution of sources, but constitutes a process of structural transformation embedded in geopolitical disputes, reconfiguration of global value chains, and center-periphery asymmetries. It discusses how sustainability criteria and taxonomies, especially in the case of biofuels, transcend technical dimensions and begin to operate as instruments of economic power, conditioning access to markets, credit, and technological standards. In the Chinese case, the article examines the strategy of "ecological civilization" articulated with long-term planning and an industrial policy focused on leadership in clean technologies, coexisting with tensions associated with the continued use of coal. In the Brazilian case, it highlights the uniqueness of a relatively renewable electricity matrix, combined with persistent limits to technological and industrial upgrading. It is concluded that transition pathways in the Global South depend on national development projects and state capacities to convert energy advantages into innovation and dynamic integration, avoiding the uncritical importation of standards defined in the center.