South Africa’s symbolic hegemony in Africa

Alden, Chris; Schoeman, Maxi

doi:10.1057/ip.2014.47

Cited by 55 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 10 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…By identifying the transition point between consensual and cooperative hegemony it will be argued that the Lula administration experienced an inflection point in Brazil's intraSouth America relations that brought the peak, albeit only partial, of the consensual hegemony (Burges, 2008) and a subsequent call for something more closely resembling a cooperative hegemony (Pedersen, 2002). Although the soft power leadership intrinsic to consensual hegemony demonstrated far more traction and potential power in South America than might be the case in other seemingly similar situations such as South Africa in sub-Saharan Africa (Alden and Schoeman, 2015;Shaw, 2015), it nevertheless still had distinct medium-and long-term limitations as a strategy without the use of more proactive leadership tactics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Revisiting consensual hegemony: Brazilian regional leadership in question

Burges

2014

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central challenge confronting Brazilian foreign policy is its reluctance to accept measures that might restrict national autonomy. This limits the extent to which Brazil can lead and leverage the region, particularly in the face of competing visions such as ALBA and the Pacific Alliance. The issues is Brazil's continued reliance on a consensual hegemony approach to regional relations after neighbouring countries opened space for a more assertive leadership closer to Pedersen's model of cooperative hegemony. Although consensual hegemony allowed Brazil to establish its project in South America, by the end of Lula's first presidential term more was being demanded and the failure to provide leadership goods weakened Brazil's regional position. Current questioning of Brazilian leadership on the continent is found in an almost contradictory approach that sees Brazilian diplomats pushing away suggestions of assertive leadership while more concrete action is quietly taken by other regionally engaged sections of the Brazilian state.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Revisiting consensual hegemony: Brazilian regional leadership in question

Burges

2014

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Alternatively, a distribution of regional power shifting from bipolar/multipolar to unipolar will mean a more restrictive environment and fewer strategic options. Alden and Schoeman (2015) argue that South Africa's waning standing among Western states creates more freedom of movement for secondary and tertiary competitors in Africa.…”

Section: How Engaged Is the Global Hegemon?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do secondary states choose to support, follow or challenge?

Lobell¹,

Jesse

Williams

2015

Int Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we examine when and why secondary and tertiary states select a strategy that does not entail following the lead of the rising states. To address these questions we outline a simple model that examines systemic and sub-systemic (regional) constraints on and opportunities for secondary and tertiary states: how engaged in the region is the global hegemon, how many rising (and extra-regional) states are in the region, and which states are waxing and waning and by how much. These three characteristics create different opportunities for and constraints on secondary and tertiary states, which in turn influence the set of strategy choices of these states as they respond to the regional hegemon. Our model cannot account for the specific foreign policy strategies that secondary and tertiary states select. Such a model would require domestic and individual level variables. We leave it to the area specialists and experts in the following articles in the volume to introduce these variables and explain the specific strategies used. Instead, based on our model we can explain general tendencies toward accommodative strategies, resistance strategies and neutral strategies. It is important to note that secondary and tertiary states can use a mix of different strategies toward regional and global hegemons, such as resisting primary threats and accommodating secondary threats. Moreover, secondary and tertiary states are often engaged in multiple games -a strategy might appear to be costly and suboptimal at one level but reasonable and optimal at another level. Finally, in selecting a strategy secondary and tertiary states factor the systemic, subsystemic and domestic costs of the alternative strategies.

show abstract

“…After all, the socio-economic experience of other African countries has not improved despite SA's continued presence in the global economy. In fact, Alden and Schoeman (2015) are of the view that SA's supposedly representative position in Africa has not transformed the way Africa is viewed in the global community. They claim that evidence is in SA's membership of G-20, BRICS, and elections into UN Security Council which has failed to change the world power transfiguration to African favor.…”

Section: 'Our Exports Into the Continent Are Also Increasing Each Yeamentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-economic implications of South Africa’s foreign direct investment in Southern African development

Umezurike

Iwu

Asuelime

2016

Investment Management and Financial Innovations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Notwithstanding its struggles to tame the high levels of poverty and inequality, South Africa is considered as a major economic hub of Africa. However, as an economic hub, there are other countries that perceive South Africa as a capitalist, neo-liberal economy that goes all out to dominate not only its neighbors in the southern hemisphere, but also many other developing nations in the continent. Therefore, the main aim of the study is to assess the socio-economic implications of South Africa's foreign direct investment in Southern Africa. As far as the authors are concerned, there is yet to be a frank analyses of the varying perspectives, as well as a holistic explanation of the clearly, yet complex relationship which exists between South Africa and many other countries in the southern hemisphere. While the authors acknowledge the efforts of several scholars in trying to juxtapoze the nuances in these relationships, they insist that there has not been a contextual treatment with due consideration for the socio-economic implications of South African business expansion in Africa. Thus, the authors sincerely believe that the paper has serious implications for emerging economies especially in Africa. Other African countries can learn from South Africa's tactical brilliance; the way it has positioned its economy as a major economic hub in Africa with illustrious attractions that are derived from sophisticated infrastructure, a good educational system, a functional health care system and world class standard ecotourism. The study was conducted using documentary analysis and, therefore, allowed the researchers to source and utilize documents, both in private and public domain, on the basis of their relevance to the research.

show abstract

South Africa’s symbolic hegemony in Africa

Cited by 55 publications

References 10 publications

Revisiting consensual hegemony: Brazilian regional leadership in question

Revisiting consensual hegemony: Brazilian regional leadership in question

Why do secondary states choose to support, follow or challenge?

Socio-economic implications of South Africa’s foreign direct investment in Southern African development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About