China-Africa Economic Dispute Settlement

 The Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business published in the spring of 2023 a research article titled "Trends in China-Africa Economic Relations and Dispute Settlement" by Won Kidane, Villanova University School of Law.

While trade relations between China and Africa are theoretically subject to the same multilateral World Trade Organization rules, they are in practice mostly based on informal unilateral concessions.  Moreover, investment relations are partially governed by fragmented and mostly outdated bilateral investment treaties, and commercial relations are formalized by ad hoc contractual instruments of diverse origin and deployment.  

An African Agenda for China

 Development Reimagined, an African-led consultancy based in China, published recently a major report titled "From China-Africa to Africa-China: A Blueprint for a Green and Inclusive Continent-wide African Strategy towards China."

The report, intended primarily for African leaders, suggests a comprehensive  blueprint (28 recommendations) for a continent-wide strategy for Africa in its interaction with China.  The focus is on the economic development relationship and movement of people between Africa and China.  

Chinese Legal and Investment Issues in Africa (in French)

Thierry Pairault translated from Chinese to French a study titled "Questions de Droit et d'Investissement Chinois en Afrique" written by Han Xiuli, a legal specialist in Africa law at Xiamen University.

The author explains the need to organize a suitable system for the resolution of investment disputes between China and African countries because the International Convention is inappropriate for this purpose.

China-Africa Investment Treaties: Do They Work?

The UK's International Institute for Environment and Development published in 2016 a major study titled "China-Africa Investment Treaties: Do They Work?" by Lorenzo Cotula, Xiaoxue Weng, Qianru Ma, and Peng Ren.

The authors explain that China's bilateral investment treaties (BITs) in Africa tend to be narrowly focused and are signed with one African country at a time. The report explores the content of the China-Africa BITs and whether they achieve their stated goal of promoting foreign investment. Their preliminary finding is that the China-Africa BITs may not be fulfilling their stated goal of promoting foreign investment.

China's Economic Excursion to Africa

The winter 2016 edition of the Cornel International Law Journal is devoted to China-Africa economic issues. It contains the following articles, all of which are available on-line:

--Who is in Charge? State Power and Agency in Sino-African Relations by Padraig Carmody and Peter Kragelund.

--The Environmental Impact of China's Investment in Africa by David H. Shinn.

--Social Responsibility or Development Responsibility? What is the Environmental Impact of Chinese Investments in Africa: What are its Drivers, and What are the Possibilities for Action by Tang Xiaoyang and Irene Yuan Sun.

--Constructing Africa: Chinese Investment, Infrastructure Deficits and Development by Olufunmilayo B. Arewa.

--China's Bilateral Investment Treaties with African States in Comparative Context by Won Kidane.

--Exploring African Host Countries' Agency to Strengthen Local FDI Regulations: The Case of Chinese Investments in the Infrastructure Sector of the DRC by Sanne van der Lugt.

Obstacles to US Investment in Africa

Peter Hansen

Peter Hansen, a Washington attorney who specializes in African investment law, made a compelling case for expanding U.S. bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and double tax treaties (DTTs) with countries in Sub-Saharan Africa.  Published on 4 February 2013 by The Heritage Foundation and titled "Unleashing the U.S. Investor in Africa: A Critique of U.S. Policy Toward the Continent,"  Hansen pointed out that the United States has only six BITs in Sub-Saharan Africa with Cameroon, the Republic of the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, Rwanda and Senegal.  The United States only has a DTT with South Africa.

By comparison, France has 11 BITs and 26 DTTs with Sub-Saharan Africa, Germany has 26 BITs and even China has 11 BITs.  Hansen argues that these governments have significantly reduced the risk for companies from their countries to invest in Africa while the United States has failed to give this program a sufficiently high priority.  As a result, American companies are reluctant to invest in important countries such as Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya and Ethiopia.