This year?s Global Economic Prospects 2008 (GEP ?08) from the World Bank begins by examining the diffusion of technology amongst developing countries, how they have been trading and investing more amongst themselves, and cushioning the intensity of the economic slowdown in developed economies. But there is an aspect that it does not touch upon which, nevertheless, plays a behind-the-scenes part in the report. That relates to the place and position of the four Bric economies.

As for technology?the special theme of this year?s report?that is of special interest in these economies. Their abilities range from an innate ability to generate technology (as in the Russian Federation), absorb and acclimatise it (as does China) or assimilate it after its advent in the shape of FDI (India). Meanwhile, there is no real dearth of technology inflows because, today, it is in the interest of private capital to set up abroad?owing either to a nearness to raw material sources or the availability of inexpensive, but appropriately skilled, labour.

China, which lacks in raw materials, makes up through the provision of a conducive business environment and an economy that is open to imports of raw materials. That is the case also in India. But, going by the report, the West appear to have lost out owing to the vanishing of export markets.

There were many such markets once, and they thrived as long as developing economies desired to industrialise, or indigenise. They imported components and intermediates from developed economies and turned them into finished products (either for re-export, or for the local market).

Those days are gone, however, and GEP ?08 shows how China sources one fourth of all imports from East Asia?meaning Hong Kong, Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea, Taiwan, the Phillipines and Singapore. There is even a good chance that the current OECD recession will dry up import demand in the West and force China (and other East Asian economies) to take an even closer look at these contiguous economies. Even domestic demand is likely to soften and drop by 0.2%. GEP ?08 says that such a development will lead to a 0.2% fall-off in the contribution of demand to GDP?both via lower private consumption and a drop in investment in 2008.

In fact, GEP ?08 even expects regional GDP growth to decelerate to 6.1% in 2008 and 5.7% in 2009. That will owe to tighter international credit, and the softening of import demand, adversely affecting the entire region in 2008.

The short point, then, is that even though China stands to gain as an investment destination, it must seek out contiguous markets to sustain growth. And that is just the motivation behind the latest debate on ?disengagement? versus interdependence?meaning, of course, that the fast industrialising, developing, economies can no longer rely on OECD trade or investment links.

They must look within themselves instead. And, the South?s dynamic being thus, it came as no surprise when the first half of 2007 saw industrial production in East Asia being energised and accelerating by 20%.

Even South Asia?s sustained buoyancy has been linked to double-digit growth in India. And GEP ?08 reports that Latin America and the Caribbean, too, had a 6.4% increase in industrial production during the second quarter of 2007, or 2.4% more than during the first quarter. If, despite all that, the developed economies gained, then that was simply because growing developing economies such as the Bric bloc mostly had very strong supply-side linkages with developed markets.

That is clear, of course, about China which gets US capital and needs the US market to sell its products and services. But it is increasingly getting less obvious about India, which has China as its largest interlocutor in trade.

In short, GEP ?08 clearly demonstrates that real gains from trade and openness have been accruing to the advanced developing countries. That is what explains why, although their rate of import growth was 5.7% in the 1990s compared to the OECD?s 7%, even that has changed in the last seven years. That also explains how developing economy imports grew by 14.3% in 2006, or almost double that of the OECD?s 7.9%.

So, not only has there been double-digit import growth across developing regions, the commercial virility of the latter has also been brought out by GEP ?08. It presents evidence on how the latter?s share of world markets has rocketed from 20% in 2000, to 35%.

GEP ?08 also shows developing countries have their quota of high-flyers?with China, India heading the list. Clearly, these are the twin growth drivers amongst developing economies that have been helping the vast majority of the rest to stave off a slowdown in the face of weaker US import growth. Without them, growth would stand reduced to just 5.7% for developing economies. That also explains why GEP ?08 hopes for unflagging growth in China, India and the oil-exporting economies. It sees that as being vital to sustain global, developing-country growth over 2008 and 2009.

As for shifts in ?direction of trade?, the first reason for that is the weakening of certain OECD currencies?foremost amongst them being the US-dollar. That curbs import consumption by hiking prices, and GEP ?08 confirms a reported fall in America?s current account deficit?from a 2005 (fourth quarter) high of 6.8% of GDP, to 5.5% by the second quarter of 2007.

Finally, India?s stance on technology must cease to be contradictory if it is not to land up as the laggard in Bric. India suffers from many ills but few facilitators. The two biggest ills the country faces are an unwillingness to welcome new technology since the populace lacks broad-based education and fungible skills. Successive governments quite naturally mistrust new ideas, which means that the only positive signs are in the private sector?but only when competition intrudes.