China's aid to Africa: competitor or alternative to the OECD aid architecture?

Abstract

PurposeThe emergence of the Chinese aid consensus has come to have profound implications for sustainability. The Beijing Consensus “sovereignty doctrine” of non‐interference, presents a stark contrast to the Washington Consensus architecture of imposed conditionalities and the serving of geopolitical interests. For this reason, from Africa's perspective, the Beijing Consensus appears to represent the preferred comprehensive meta‐narrative for Africa. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the attributes of “good” aid architecture in relation to the peculiarities of Africa's challenges.Design/methodology/approachIn examining its principles, objectives, framework differences and impact, the Beijing model shows that it supports the human rights which “unleash”, empower and protect self‐directed development grounded in ownership and in the strategic interests of recipients.FindingsThe Washington Consensus has been problematic for African development because it is economistic and exclusively instrumentalist. While conceding to this shortcoming, the inability of the consensus to appreciate the unique and complex development problems of Africa is more troubling. Comparing the two, the Beijing Consensus, which is multidimensional and encompasses the intrinsic and non‐economic roles of development aid, with the consequence of over‐emphasizing expanding local policy, is adjudged practical for Africa. The conclusion is that the dominant Washington Consensus is too poorly articulated and structured to respond to declared determination for ownership, mitigating capabilities deprivation, and improving development control.Originality/valueThis paper has argued that the basic approach of the Beijing Consensus has been more generous and more attractive for sustainable development in Africa. Much more important, perhaps, is the ability of the consensus to appreciate the unique and complex development problems which occur as a consequence of donor deafness on limited rights and conditionalities. In sum, the Beijing Consensus results in exclusionary changes of “less magnitude and speed” and promotes poverty reduction and sustainable development. Taken together, these factors and practices mean that the Beijing Consensus best serves the staircase of a nation's pathway to indigenous development, when compared with the Washington Consensus. Such a comprehensive meta‐narrative that builds alliances and creates a foundation for enlightened and effective politics of development aid will “unleash”, empower and protect the full potential of Africa.

Capitalism and colonial approach reborn? Chinese economic involvement in Africa

“…Relative investments in various sectors have helped to lower transaction costs and facilitate trade (Edinger & Labuschagne, 2019). However, some critics argue that these benefits are unequal (Babaci-Wilhite, Geo-JaJa, & Shizhou, 2013). China has created neo-colonialism (Johnson, Paik, & Larsen, 2011) since China strategically selects projects where the investment benefits itself (Matthews et al, 2016).…”

“…Most of the time, Western involvement does not offer solutions for specific problems or cannot adapt the framework to local circumstances. However, it attempts to promote values such as capitalism, liberalization, privatization, and free markets (Babaci‐Wilhite et al, 2013). Furthermore, the Western approach allows addressing problems regarding the African political economy of growth.…”

Fifty years of deleterious external engagement with sub‐Saharan African states

“…In some ways the Chinese model appears to be more beneficial for African countries as it promotes self‐determinism, independence and innovation (Carmody, 2011). In comparison, the dominant US aid structures are bureaucratic, rigid, and do not consider the individual needs of each country (Babaci‐Wilhite, Geo‐JaJa, & Shizhou, 2013). This means China is better suited to respond to the needs of African countries and may be more pragmatic in their interventions in the continent (Zeleza, 2014).…”

The model of French development assistance – who gets the help?

“…Therefore, the emergence of South-South development cooperation has influenced the position of traditional donors in a much serious way, than the recommendation to increase the multiparty aid element. Some research values South-originated aid as multidimensional and encompassing the intrinsic and non-economic roles of development and hence very practical for African economies (Babaci-Wilhite et al, 2013). Realization of sustainable development goals investments in joint investment promotion mechanisms, joint programs for absorptive capacity and joint public-private partnership models are said to be more likely to happen in the scope of regional and South-South cooperation (UN WIR, 2014).…”