Debating China’s New Role in Africa’s Political Economy

Mhandara, Lawrence; Manyeruke, Charity; Nyemba, Eve

doi:10.7552/0-2-107

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given African economies’ historical reliance on European aid, trade, and investment, African leaders are more willing to accept a direct and focused Chinese approach that comes with fewer strings attached compared with European conditionalities. There are claims that China’s acceleration of its investment in Africa over the past three decades is mainly because of its growing demand for natural resources to fuel its domestic economy (Deepak 2014 ; Mhandara et al 2013 ; Okolo and Akwu 2016 ). However, China’s presence in Africa is not purely driven by economic factors.…”

Section: China In Africa: In Comes the Dragonmentioning

confidence: 99%

China and the European Union in Africa: win–win-lose or win–win-win?

Che

Bodomo

2023

Asia Eur J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The twenty-first century has brought in its wake a flurry of competing foreign investment players on the African investment sphere. This situation may be called the globalization of foreign investment (Bodomo 2017 ). Foreign investment features as a salient issue for intellectual discussions of topics such as agency, soft power, and symmetry. In this paper, we outline the important role that China and the European Union (EU), the biggest investment polities in Africa, have played in the globalization of investment in Africa and argue that China has, indeed, created a paradigm shift with respect to its investment engagement with the African continent. This paradigm shift may be calibrated in terms of the volume of engagement; in terms of the speed and efficiency with which investment projects are completed, and, in terms of the very discourse of trade and investment. The argument is advanced further by discussing some of the main features of Chinese investment that distinguish it from that of other global players on the African continent, such as Europe. We further extend arguments from our previous work (Bodomo 2017 ; Bodomo and Che 2020 ) to say that if Africa does not sharpen its agency, the end result may be that China and the EU may gain at the expense of Africa but that should Africa play a more proactive and controlling role such as enforcing its investment laws, the mid-twenty-first century may yet see a trilateral win–win-win outcome for Africa, China, and the EU.

show abstract

Section: China In Africa: In Comes the Dragonmentioning

confidence: 99%

China and the European Union in Africa: win–win-lose or win–win-win?

Che

Bodomo

2023

Asia Eur J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, the relations between Brazil and Zimbabwe fall within SSC values and principles, that is, based on mutual benefit, partnership, non-conditionality, sharing experiences, respect for sovereignty, and non-interference. However, it should be known that perfect win-win scenarios, in theory, are not easily attainable in practice (see, Carmody, 2016; Mhandara et al, 2013, p. 96; Mukwereza, 2015, p. 3). Even if win-win international cooperation were attainable, its success would also be affected by community–state-market contestations (Hayami & Godo, 2005).…”

Section: Conceptualizing and Contextualizing Ssc And Mfimentioning

confidence: 99%

South–South Cooperation in Agriculture: Impacts of Brazil’s More Food International Program on Post-Land Reform Social Organizations in Zimbabwe

Muchetu

Shonhe

2022

Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy: A triannual Journ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

South–South Cooperation has received significant attention. This article assesses the implications of Brazil’s More Food International on farm-level social organizations in Goromonzi and Mvurwi districts in Zimbabwe. Data was collected using mainly focus group discussions, key-informant interviews, and the application of a questionnaire among 410 farming households. Differentiated implications and outcomes were observed between the two districts. Overall, the Brazilian programs improved access to tractor and irrigation implements. Still, the implements were more suited to the large-scale production systems rather than to those of the small-scale A1 farmers. Furthermore, a top-down approach utilized by the state has adverse consequences. The prerequisite of forming cooperatives before accessing the tractors and irrigation implements disrupted local political and socio-economic organizations already in existence within the two districts. The study concludes that, while farm mechanization is crucial for agricultural production, the exclusion of the farmers during policy conceptualization undermines the success of these programs.

show abstract

“…This has continued to undermine weaker African economies, especially in their trade and investment relationships with BRICS members. As Mhandara et al (2013) point out, the dynamism of China-Africa relations requires constantly monitoring and a reassessment of various agreements in order to ensure consistency in the principles and practices of the long history of cooperation. Africa has become a major investment and trade destination for China and South Africa as well as other BRICS members.…”

Section: Conclusion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Counting the Cost? A Cautionary Analysis of South Africa's BRICS Membership

Umezurike

Ogunnubi

2016

JEBS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BRICS is a grouping of five major developing countries that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, all with the ambition of changing the governance architecture of international political-economy but with claims to speedy industrialization, fast growing economies and relatively strong regional and global influence. South Africa joined BRICS at the invitation of China in 2010 and has shown commitment to the group through friendly relations with other member countries. The countryâ€™s extensive economic links with China and the other BRICS states underpinned its strategy of diversifying its external trade especially with regard to looking away from West. This article employs content analysis to reflect on South Africaâ€™s membership of BRICS, focusing specifically on the countryâ€™s relations with China. It argues that, while South Africaâ€™s economic indicators do not fit well with the BRICS grouping, China is promoting this relationship in order to counter the Westâ€™s neo-imperialism and neo-liberal rhetoric. South Africaâ€™s willingness to accept Chinese superiority in the African market and to act as a junior partner in the global power configuration makes the country the perfect choice for this project.

show abstract

Debating China’s New Role in Africa’s Political Economy

Cited by 6 publications

References 4 publications

China and the European Union in Africa: win–win-lose or win–win-win?

China and the European Union in Africa: win–win-lose or win–win-win?

South–South Cooperation in Agriculture: Impacts of Brazil’s More Food International Program on Post-Land Reform Social Organizations in Zimbabwe

Counting the Cost? A Cautionary Analysis of South Africa's BRICS Membership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About