Abstract

International Relations theories play a crucial role in understanding the dynamics between nations. Therefore, this research paper explores the power dynamics in emerging nations through the lens of international relations theories, specifically focusing on the role of power transition, neo-regionalism, and neo-functionalism. Power transition theory examines the shifts in global power and influence among nations, shedding light on the changing dynamics within BRICS. Neo-regionalism highlights the growing trend of regional cooperation and integration, providing insights into the regional dynamics within BRICS. Neo-functionalism explores how functional cooperation in specific areas can lead to deeper integration and collaboration among the BRICS nations. By analyzing these theories, this research paper aims to unravel the power dynamics within BRICS and their implications for the international stage. The findings of this study will contribute to a better understanding of how power is distributed and cooperation evolves within BRICS.

Key Words

International Relations, Theories, Power Transition, Dynamics, BRICS

Introduction

Different theorists and scholars employ various theories to explain inter-state relations in the global political arena. Thus theories of International relations help people understand to develop a better sense of the global world order. Such can be developed through various theoretical perspectives (McGlinchey & Gold, 2017). In the context of a complex theoretical framework, three different theories have been applied to understand the power dynamics in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) i.e. power transition theory, Neo-Regionalism, and Neo-Functionalism. However, the Power transition theory was developed by Organski and later on subject to various scholars’ insights and development. The basic aim of power transition theory was to structure the world order into a hierarchical order with one dominant power on the international structure and then placing the other rising regional and global powers. Similarly, he also pointed out that various regional powers are emerging and structuring world order according to their interests, stakes opportunities, and challenges. Hence, the emergence of BRICS and the transformations in the world order will be explained through the lens of power transition theory. 

Whereas, Neo-regionalism is the integration of multiple regions through cooperation and diplomacy, rather than just focusing on a single region’s cultural and economic integration. Neo-regionalism is identified by scholars in the context of the political and economic emerging world order. Thus Neo-Regionalism gave rise to the establishment of regional organizations with common objectives. To be more specific, concerning the global economy, the ancient form of Neo-Regionalism or functional institutionalism tended towards the protectionist economic blocs, where trade between or among countries was encouraged in the pursuit of economic development and increasing integration of countries. Thus, the integration later added various regional projects (Buzdugan, 2017). 

In the study of Neo-Regionalism, and Neo-Functionalism many scholars argued what types of regions play vital roles and are more functional to govern or rule. Classical theories of cooperation and integration among regions; such as functionalism and Neo-functionalism have appreciated the cordial relations between and among the states. These early perspectives analyzed the interests of states in pursuit of which they concluded mutual relations with each other. Neo-functionalism illustrates the design of organizations which are seen as an effective instrument for solving issues (Soderbaum, 2011).   

Furthermore, Soderbaum (2011) writes that institutionalism has gained a significant place in the wake of functionalism. The contemporary world is in dire need of Neo-Functionalism which is considered to be one of the most dominating approaches. Thus it shares the idea that although states are rational actors "institutions matter" because states largely depend on one another in the pursuit of national interest and common goals. This implies that state behaviour is affected by various degrees of institutions across various issues in the areas of both regional and international politics.

Neo-regionalism is oriented towards interactions between state and non-state actors in the process of transforming the world power structure. BRICS is therefore a forum of emerging powers to shape the world order. This powerful grouping aimed to become the leading market economy along with promoting development and cooperation. BRICS countries comprise 41 per cent of the world's population with 23 per cent of the world's GDP and share 16 per cent in the world trade. These emerging economies have become the main drivers over the years concerning global economic growth. For this purpose BRICS organizes several summits on addressing issues of global importance like; the global financial and security situation, counter-terrorism, reforming of global financial institutions and significant ways to promote intra-BRICS collaboration (Bhunia, 2019). Thus, BRICS in the context of power transition theory, neo-regionalism and neo-functional emerged as an organization of major powers i.e. a step towards a multi-polar world. However, the aforementioned theories were suitable and fit well to comprehend the power dynamics and to better analyze the role and emergence of BRICS in the global world order. The underlined discussion is the continuation of efforts in this direction.




The Power Transition Theory

The power transition theory was introduced by Organski in 1958 and pioneered the idea that international order is structured in the hierarchal form in terms of the power of the states. The power transition theory deals with the model of changing power relationships in international politics. This theory focuses on both structural and dynamic set-up. Structurally, it visualizes world politics distributed in the hierarchal order of the states with changing standards of cooperating and contesting with each other. Moreover, PTT specifies the comparative role of states within the hierarchal structure, and the pattern of governing rules, and then outlines how powerful states attempt to manage world politics. However, the dynamic form demonstrates how and why change occurs in the global order. Thus, the concept of power associates both the forms and structural picture with the dynamic change. However, the key components of the power transition theory comprise hierarchy, power, and satisfaction, out of which hierarchy is the major component which is the main focus of this theory (Lemke et al, 2011).    

 

Main Postulates of the Theory

? The international system is not as anarchical at all.

? The international order is organized in the Hierarchical order i.e. Dominant Nation, Great powers, Middle powers, Small powers and Colonies. 

? The powerful, dominant states will maintain their leadership in the world order, whereas weak or dissatisfied states consequently challenge the dominant power as they become stronger. 

? The objective of Nations is not to maximize the State’s power but to maximize the net gains

? Peaceful cooperation ensues when parties agree to cooperation

“Hierarchy”, this term refers to the regional and international power structure. The regional and global international hierarchies vary and fluctuate over time. However, the strongest power structure in the global order is one where the dominant power possesses the support from the coalition of the satisfied major allies. For instance, in the pyramid of hierarchy, it is the most powerful nation that towers over the world for most of its time in the international order. For instance, in the past two to three decades the US has dominated the global order of its rival states. The US has the support of the satisfied allied countries out of which the most notable are; France, Canada, the UK, Italy, and South Korea etc., which elevates the stability and power of the US in the global world as a dominant power (Lemke et al, 2011). Organski through its theoretical perspective explains the hierarchal order of states in the following manner. 

Figure 1

PTT hierarchal pyramid of the states in the international order



Source: (Organski & Kugler, 2015 p, 174)




 

The emergence of BRICS could be evaluated through the lens of Organski’s power transition theory. In the hierarchal order of the world, the dominant state is the US, since the disintegration of the USSR in 1991 and in the Post-Cold War era. As discussed earlier in the hierarchal pyramid of the world order, after the dominant nations there are great or major powers that have the potential of challenging the dominant nation in the future. Thus, BRICS is the grouping of five major economies namely; Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa having most of its potential to confront US hegemonic designs. These five countries have much development to play on the world stage, particularly in terms of the economic and financial crisis (Lemke et al., 2011). These countries are a challenge to the world’s modern economic realities. In the past decade, the major powers in the economic context have had significant growth rates and have led to their significant share of the world’s GDP i.e. 43% while the US and Europe together share 36% (Yilmaz & Xiangyu, 2020). It is hereby important to note that in today's world, the power of a state in economic contexts plays a more significant role in influencing world politics than that of the political self-sufficiency of a state. Further, the power transition theory has maintained its connection with the realistic approach to international order by stressing the fact that power is a critical variable and is shaped by the way that it works in the international order.

However, the power transition theory explains the distribution of states in the international order in an exactly different way. As per power transition theory, the rising powers are often dissatisfied with the international order created by the dominant powers of the world. This dissatisfaction with rising powers stems from the fact that the international order in many ways advantages its creators and its allies and the rising powers remained disadvantaged. Due to the fact, such dissatisfaction of states leads to the confrontation between the dominant and rising powers, and dissatisfied states consequently become challengers to the international order and strive to reform or shatter the existing order of the world to build a new world order. In this connection, the emerging economies (BRICS) attempt to challenge the international order created by the US (Fei, et al. 2020).     

Whereas, dominant power(s) are not inclined to voluntarily give up on their power in the international order. Therefore, to establish a new international order rising powers use force and thus the great power war takes place as described by power transition theory.  It is also said that peaceful power transitions are possible if the rising power(s) are satisfied with the status quo. However, such a combination of motivation and dissatisfaction among the states constitutes a danger to the international order. It is said that dissatisfaction is a variable, whereas realists on the contrary regard it as an analytical constant and posit that "states do not become status quo powers until they completely dominate the system (Mearsheimer, 2001)”. And thereby, renders all non-dominant major powers necessarily dissatisfied. What do these differences indicate for the examination and interpretation of international power shifts in general and the emergence of rising powers such as; China and India in particular? To employ Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a crude power, the current international power arrangement can be described as follows.

If nominal GDP ratings are taken as an indicator of state power, the US is still leading in this connection globally. As of 2015, its GDP of 17,946,996 million compared to current US dollars is slightly lower than the major powers like; Japan, China, and Germany combined. Thus to evaluate the GDP of the top ten ranked countries, the number of powers that are allies of the US or are on cordial terms with it such as; the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and India. On the other hand, there is no committed ally yet with China and the allegiance of Brazil and Russia is also unclear. This implies that the power imbalance exists and it favours the US.  The countries like China in particular and India and Brazil in general when these growth rates are projected into the future these countries become more noticeable (Gates & Kim, 2015). Altogether BRICS countries according to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report will surpass the combined GDP of the US and Europe by 2020. Moreover, according to Goldman Sachs by the end of 2020, China alone will match the US GDP rates. However, BRICS is not a stable alliance to support China under all circumstances. Russia might be inclined closer to China because of its conflicts with the US, whereas India in recent years has strengthened its ties with the US. Thereby the US has several powerful allies from North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members of other countries like Japan and Australia (Rauch, 2018). 

In addition, let's discuss the current situation and expected future power arrangements within the context discussed above: In the current situation the US and its allies are still much more powerful than China and its allies (Lai, 2011). However, not all power transition theories see BRICS countries as revisionist powers. Some of them take the view that even Putin's Policy towards Ukraine is a status-quo strategy aiming to secure Russia’s influence in the post-USSR space and counterpoise NATO’s expansion eastward. These analysts take the view that the same status-quo motives drive China and Russia's behaviour at the international level. For instance; China and Russia are quite suspicious of the United Nations (UN) reform preferring to keep intact its power and structure. On the contrary, other BRICS countries (Brazil, India, and South Africa) express their interest in the United Nations reform in the hope that their status will be elevated particularly in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and generally in the entire UN system.

The status-quo version of the power transition theory takes the view that many problems with the BRICS countries stem from the fact of their non-integration in terms of the global security system that emerged in the post-Cold War era.  For example; the Russian-Georgian armed conflict in August 2008 was a clear manifestation of Western policy, the Saakashvili's regime attack on South Ossetia. The Ukrainian crisis that took place in 2014 and continues to date, after the removal of the Yanukovich regime, Kyiv authorities coming into power showed up their intention to join NATO and the European Union. Thus, Moscow attempted to reintegrate Crimea into Russia and supported pro-Russian rebels in the southeastern part (Donbas) of Ukraine. According to this view, Russia’s policy to reintegrate Crimea is determined by both its geo-political and geo-economic interests. Therefore particularly speaking, there is continuous competition between the Russian and European Union's integration projects in the post-USSR space i.e. Moscow-led Eurasian Economic Union and the European Union's Eastern Partnership program respectively (Feng, 2013). 

However, proponents of this viewpoint believe that it is better to cooperate rather than come into a confrontation with Russia. Therefore, the same approach is suggested concerning BRICS countries particularly China for its One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative. Despite various advantages, the power transition theory also has shortcomings. After a detailed analysis, it is concluded that this theory could be more appropriately applied to the Cold War era, when the two superpowers US and USSR were engaged to maintain the status quo due to the threat of mutual destruction in the nuclear war event. Hence, the present-day world order is still in its formative phase. In this connection, BRICS in recent times assumed responsibility in other areas of the world such as; climate change, transnational organized crime, international terrorism, and restructuring of international organizations including the UN. Generally speaking,  BRICS countries clarify their willingness to build a more efficacious model of world order without any confrontation.   

Summing up, if the advocates of the Power Transition Theory want this theory to better fit into the present-day realities and keep intact its explanatory power,  they need to revise the typology of States they use and supplement it with a new reformist type of power.

Critiques of Power Transition Theory

The critiques of power transition theory view that little support has been found for any of power transition theory’s main empirical implications. Contrary to that most versions of the theory critiques found that the European and the international systems rarely have been shaped by hegemonic designs. Critics of this theory argue that no state till today has achieved the status or position that allowed it for an extended period to order the international system to match the interests at the expense of other major powers. 

They further argued that power transitions are remarkably rare in a practical manner, and they seldom occur as a result of varying rates of economic growth and often occur peacefully (Valentino & Lebow, 2009). In addition to that in such cases where there is the possibility of power transition, wars between or among dominant powers infrequently take place and rarely are the solution to resolve the fundamental conflicts of states characterized by their interests.




Neo-Regionalism 

In the sense of Neo-Regionalism, the sub-national regions come together to form affiliations to increase their political power and economic influence. This theory is however shaping the post-Cold War world through the entities that can bring change politically and economically. As mentioned earlier Neo-Regionalism focuses on the integration of multiple regions in terms of trade and international cooperation. The new structural adjustments of the economy and world politics that include a series of new advancements, developments, and issues have created conditions for the Neo-Regionalism emergence after the end of the Cold War. However, in the contemporary multi-polar world order organizations have made attempts to cooperate in broader dimensions of developments in the context of regional cooperation. Initially, the states made organizations and groupings to achieve their specific agenda and were mostly limited to one specific objective. But, after the 9/11 attacks organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) expanded their cooperation from territorial boundary disputes among their member countries to economic, cultural, and financial fields to attain their substantial benefits, whereas the objective of counter-terrorism remained the appealing and foremost objective of the organization (Yuzhu, 2020). 

Key Assumptions of Neo-Regionalism

Neo-regionalism is the concept that refers to the emergence of new forms of regionalism in response to changing global conditions. Some of the key assumptions of this theory are as below:

? Regional integration can be a means of promoting economic growth and development.

? It helps address the shared challenges and promote cooperation among member states.

? Promotes stability and security in a changing global context.  

? Includes the idea that regional integration is a process of building regional identity and community.

? It can help create a more stable and prosperous environment for countries and people in a region.  

? It can lead to greater bargaining power for members

In the context of Neo-Regionalism theory, BRICS is one of the most Current examples that best fits to explain the concept of this theory (Soderbaum, 2011).  BRICS is therefore an affiliation of five major economies to reshape the world's financial institutions and restructure the global economy. Although BRICS under the banner of Neo-Regionalism formed an institution of emerging economies, it is unique in that it does not share any close geographical connections that show their historical, cultural, religious, or economic community or aimed at seeking such a community. According to the perspective of Neo-Regionalism, BRICS belongs to such global regions based on functional, multi-factor, and multi-actor principles rather than any geographical connections. Such regional institutions possess crosscutting nature and easily attempt to achieve various level objectives i.e. all at local, regional, and global to shape a completely different type of world political order (Fei, et. al 2020). Proponents of the global Neo-Regionalism theory are of the view that during its existence, BRICS has managed to regulate a transnational agenda such as cooperating in the areas like political and economic as follows: 

? Improvement in the global financial system

? Development in industrial and commercial relations

? Energy 

? Security

? Mutual cooperation in the field of climate change and environmental protection

? Joint research projects

? Fight against cyberterrorism 

? Coordination of BRICS countries in the activities of international organizations, such as the United Nations and its specialized agencies.

BRICS in support of this global agenda has created its financial institutions i.e. the New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Arrangements (CRA) both with a capital of $100 billion. Furthermore, in 2013 China initiated a project namely One Belt One Road (OBOR) also known as New Silk Road to develop land transportation via Eurasia territory.  This was later supplemented by sea routes (southern and northern sea routes) from East Asia to Europe and has acquired a global dimension by incorporating the Asia Pacific region and South America where Brazil (one of the BRICS members) is also located. 

Critiques of Neo-Regionalism

Critics of the global Neo-Regionalism theory hold the view that the BRICS forum has not yet emerged with a truly unified agenda. However, it has been observed that most of the ties within the BRICS countries are bilateral rather than multilateral. Reasons for this fact include; their numerous mutual differences and serious disagreements between countries like China and India, having territorial disputes, economic disparities, etc. that may lead to serious military and political confrontation. 

Opponents of the theoretical perspectives of Neo-Regionalism view this theory as an inappropriate approach in the globalized world. They argue that this theory has neglected the role of the state in the international arena and focuses on the role of entities like regional organizations. Further, in the context of Neo-Regionalism to some critiques, this theory has evolved as a “chaotic concept” that refers to an excessive attachment to one’s region and thus attachment to the common interests of the member states of that organization (Harrison, 2006). Furthermore, opponents of this theory also argue that it is too early to regard the BRICS forum as a united community as compared to other integrated entities. Thus, BRICS countries are not in a position to play an influential role either in the economic world or in global politics.  




Neo-Functionalism Theory

Neo-Functionalism expands on the concept by emphasizing the importance of non-state actors such as regional and international organizations in promoting functional cooperation. This is the theory of regional integration that highlights the importance of functional spillovers in the integration process. This theory posits that the integration of different societies is driven by functional needs such as the need for economic cooperation. This cooperation leads to a process of spillover, where cooperation in one area leads to cooperation in other areas, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of integration. For instance, the European Union (EU) initially cooperated in the economic areas like; agriculture, trade and free movement of capital, goods, services and people.  However, over time the EU expanded cooperation to areas such as foreign policy and security.

Another example of Neo-Functionalism in action is the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). That was initially established to promote economic cooperation among its member states. However, over time ASEAN has expanded its scope to include other areas of cooperation such as security and cultural exchange (Mielniczuk, 2014).




Key Assumptions of Neo-Functionalism

? Neo-functionalism theory is predicated on the idea that the integration of diverse societies is a natural and necessary progression.

? This theory posits that this integration is driven by a functional requirement for cooperation and coordination among various actors within the international system.

? This theory assumes that the integration process is gradual, taking place in small increments rather than all at once. 

? This theory contends that the integration process is irreversible, meaning that once countries begin to integrate, it is difficult to reverse the process.

Thus, the Neo-Functionalism perspective contributes to the evaluation of BRICS emergence in the global arena. It is an approach to forming international organizations advocating the idea of cooperating in various fields ranging from scientific, humanitarian, and social to economic issues. The law of forming international organizations is dominated by the theoretical perspective of neo-functionalism.  For over a century now it has been understood the importance of such entities that are created to execute functions via specifically conferred powers delegated by the member states of an organization (Klabbers, 2014). 

Through the lens of Neo-Functionalism BRICS; the platform of five emerging economies attempts to function in collaboration with each other to influence the global political and economic order. Their prospects include the following areas in which these countries are functioning together: Reshape the world power structure i.e. a step towards a multi-polar world, Influence the financial institutions, contain the Western bloc, develop industrial and commercial relations at the global level, Joint research projects, Fight against global and cyber terrorism and to coordinate the activities in the international organizations mainly in United Nations and its specialized agencies. In support of the global and regional agenda of BRICS countries, these economies have attempted to function by establishing different economic institutions like; China's One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative 2013 whose list totals 790 projects, New Development Bank (NDB) in 2014, Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) in 2014, etc (Mielniczuk, 2014). 

In summary, Neo-Functionalism is the theory of regional integration emphasizing the role of functional spillovers in the integration process. The creation of EU, ASEAN and BRICS demonstrates how functional needs can drive the integration process and lead to a self-reinforcing cycle of cooperation. 




Critiques of Neo-Functionalism Theory

Some critiques of Neo-Functionalism include the argument that it overemphasizes the role of functional needs in driving the integration process and that political factors such as the interests of member states have a greater influence. Another critique is that it is too optimistic about the prospects for integration and that the process of spillover is not inevitable. However, cooperation in one area does not necessarily lead to cooperation in other areas. Critics argue that there are often economic and political barriers to further the integration among member states, such as the barriers like concerns about the state's sovereignty and domestic opposition etc. Finally, some scholars view that Neo-Functionalism is not applicable to all regions of the world and the European experience of integration is unique and cannot be replicated in other regions (Khara, 2020).  




Correlation between Power Transition, Neo Regionalism and Neo Functionalism

Power Transition Theory, Neo-Regionalism, and Neo-Functionalism theory all address the issue of cooperation among states and the role of power in the international system. Power transition theory argues that the international system is characterized by the competition for power between states and that this competition can lead to conflict. Neo-regionalism is the theory that emphasizes the importance of regional cooperation in addressing common challenges and promoting economic growth. Whereas, Neo-Functionalism argues that cooperation in one area can lead to cooperation in the other areas and that this process of spillover can lead to further integration. 

However, "Power" is the main focus of states in global politics and economy, these theories address the issue of power in the international system in a form that, power transition theory, emphasizes the significance of power in shaping the behaviour of states, while neo-regionalism and neo-functionalism theories both address the issue of power in shaping the process of integration. 

By understanding the relationships between these theories, one can better understand the dynamics of international relations and the factors that shape the behaviour of states. 




Paradigm Shift: Hypothesis about the Future of BRICS

Power Transition Theory, Neo-Regionalism, and Neo Functionalism offer different perspectives on how international cooperation and power dynamics develop. Power transition theory argues that the international system is characterized by competition for power among states and that this competition can lead to conflict. As a result, the rise of new powers like BRICS countries could challenge the dominance of traditional powers like the US and Europe, leading to increased competition and potential conflict. 

Neo-regionalism, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of regional cooperation in addressing common challenges and promoting economic growth. As BRICS countries continue to grow and increase their influence, they may seek to increase regional cooperation to address common challenges such as climate change, terrorism, and economic inequality. This could lead to increased integration and cooperation within the BRICS region, potentially leading to greater economic growth and stability. 

Neo-Functionalism suggests that cooperation in one area can lead to cooperation in other areas, and can lead to further integration. As BRICS countries continue to cooperate in areas such as trade and finance, this could lead to increased cooperation in other areas such as security and foreign policy. 

However, based on these paradigms, hypotheses about the future of BRICS assert that as BRICS countries continue to grow and increase their influence, they may challenge the dominance of traditional powers and lead to increased competition for power. Another hypothesis is that increased regional cooperation within the BRICS region could lead to increased economic growth and stability. Finally, increased cooperation in one area could lead to spillover effects and increased cooperation in other areas. 

Overall, the future of BRICS will be shaped by a complex interplay of factors, including economic growth, regional cooperation and competition for power in the international system. 

Conclusion

Several international yet modern theories hold the view that along with the pursuit of pragmatic state interests, BRICS countries can actively use this forum of integration to intensify their position in the international arena and strengthen their status at the global level. It should be further noted that BRICS was flourishing to present itself as a new driver of global world order which is a serious and direct alternative to the prevalent world order by the West. BRICS is, therefore, based on the principles of mutual respect, cooperation, and balance of interests rather than dictation, the balance of power, and hierarchy. Thus, it is inopportune to ascertain the status of BRICS, but this is undoubtedly luminous that some positive experiences have already been gathered by the BRICS forum and it has good prospects.

To sum up, Power transition theory, soft power and peaceful coexistence concepts, the theory of "global Neo-Regionalism" and status theories are reviewed. However, the Status theory is the theory that seeks to explain the behaviours of the states individually in terms of expectations and performance in the world order. However, each of the theories suggests its theoretical interpretation of the BRICS phenomenon, as well as its vision of this group's role in world politics and economy. It is safe to assume that despite the limitations of these theories each of them has some explanatory power. Being used together, they can help study in an interdisciplinary way, complex phenomena, such as the BRICS.

References

• Feng, Y. (2013). Global Power Transitions and Their Implications for the 21st Century. Pacific Focus, 28(2), 170–189.
• Sergunin, A., Konyshev, V., & Fei, G. (2020). International Relations Theory and the BRICS Phenomenon. Journal of China and International Relations, 67–82.
• Kim, W., & Gates, S. (2015). Power transition theory and the rise of China. International Area Studies Review, 18(3), 219–226.
• Gold, D., & McGlinchey, S. (2017). Getting Started with International Relations Theory.
• Harrison, J. (2006). Re-reading the new regionalism: A sympathetic critique. Space and Polity, 10(1), 21–46.
• Klabbers, J. (2014). The Emergence of Functionalism in International Institutional Law: Colonial Inspirations. European Journal of International Law, 25(3), 645– 675.
• Nabin, K., & Khara. (n.d.). Functionalism and Neofunctionalism: Some Critical Perspectives.
• Lai, D. (2011). THE POWER TRANSITION THEORY. JSTOR.
• Lemke, D., Kugler, J., & Tammen, L. R. (2011). Power Transition Theory. TransResearch Consortium.
• Mearsheimer, J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.
• Mielniczuk, F. (2014). The BRICS Economic Institutions and International Politics.
• Rauch, C. (2018). Realism and Power Transition Theory: Different Branches of the Power Tree.
• Soderbaum, F. (2011). Theories of Regionalism. The Routledge Handbook of Asian Regionalism.
• Lebow, R. N., & Valentino, B. (2009). Lost in Transition: A Critical Analysis of Power Transition Theory. International Relations, 23(3), 389–410.
• Yilmaz, S., & Xiangyu, W. (2020). Power Transition Theory Revisited: When Rising China Meets Dissatisfied United States. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 1–25.