China as Africa's Partner of Choice and Debt

The Institute for Security Studies (ISS) published on 13 March 2019 a commentary titled "High Cost of Having China as Africa's Partner of Choice" by Stellah Kwasi, ISS Pretoria.

Because of China's policy of not attaching political conditions to its aid and loans, many African countries have turned to Beijing as the partner of choice. The author argues that the relationship is raising questions about the true cost of the benefits Africa is receiving as debt piles up in some countries.

Aid Conditionality in Africa: Impact of Chinese Aid

The Chinese Political Science Review published online on 3 February 2017 a study titled "Does Conditionality Still Work? China's Development Assistance and Democracy in Africa" by Xiaojun Li, The University of British Columbia.

The author asks whether aid conditionality still works with China's rise as a major donor since the early 2000s. The results show that the democratizing effects of the OECD's development aid in Sub-Saharan African have diminished. The findings support the thesis that the democratizing effect of aid conditionality works only during a period when recipient countries do not have other alternative sources of aid, allowing donors to more credibly commit to enforcing conditionality.

China/Africa: Interview with Howard W. French

The Diplomat published on 8 May 2014 a short interview on China-Africa relations with Howard W. French, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism and former New York Times Shanghai bureau chief.

New Data Base for Measuring China's Aid to Africa

AidData introduced on 29 April 2013 at the Center for Global Development in Washington its dataset on Chinese aid to Africa based on an innovative media-based data collection program.  It posted the data at aiddata.org/content/index. Estimates of the size and nature of Chinese aid to Africa vary widely.  In an effort to overcome this problem, AidData, based at the College of William and Mary in Virginia, has compiled a database of thousands of media reports on Chinese-backed projects in Africa from 2000 to 2011.  The database includes information on 1,673 projects in 51 African countries and on $75 billion in commitments of official finance. 

One of the items on the website is a paper titled "China's Development Finance to Africa: A Media-Based Approach to Data Collection" by Austin Strange; Bradley Parks, executive director, AidData; Michael J. Tierney; Andreas Fuchs, post-doctoral fellow at Princeton University; Axel Dreher; and Vijaya Ramachandran, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development.  The paper describes the new database methodology, key findings, and possible applications and limitations of the data.  The paper and database offer a new tool set for researchers, policymakers, journalists, and civil society organizations to understand China's growing role in Africa.

The dataset is not without controversy.  Deborah Brautigam, one of the world's leading authorities on China's aid to Africa and now at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington, is critical of the methodology.  She voiced her concerns in a blog posting dated 30 April 2013 titled "Rubbery Numbers on Chinese Aid."

On 1 May 2013, AidData responded to Deborah Brautigam in a blog posting titled "A Rejoinder to Rubbery Numbers on Chinese Aid."  Let the debate continue!!!

Writing for The Guardian on 29 April 2013, Claire Provost and Rich Harris comment on the dataset in an article titled "China Commits Billions in Aid to Africa as Part of Charm Offensive - Interactive."

The China Africa Project has a 58 minute podcast on this issue and a Chinese project in the DRC that appears under the title "The AidData Controversy: Tracking Chinese Finance in Africa."

Chinese vs. Western Development Model in Africa

PRAXIS: The Fletcher Journal of Human Security published in 2012 an article titled "China in Africa: What the Policy of Nonintervention Adds to the Western Development Dilemma." The author is Madison Condon, a joint J.D./MALD candidate between Harvard Law School and the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

Madison Condon/LinkedIn

The article makes the point that Chinese loans and investments are typically made in exchange for securing access to natural resources. Based on its principles of nonintervention and respect for sovereignty, "China gives this money with little or no strings attached."

The author argues that the Chinese model is a legitimate challenger to Western aid.

While the article contains some annoying imprecision as it intermingles investment, loans and aid, it does offer a useful juxtaposition of the so-called Washington and Beijing Consensus models.