| Field |
Value |
Language |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Chan, L-H
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3851-8329
|
en_US |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Lee, PK |
en_US |
|
dc.date.issued |
2017 |
en_US |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
CSGR Working Paper No. 281/17, 2017 |
en_US |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10453/138962
|
|
|
dc.publisher |
University of Warwick |
en_US |
|
dc.relation.ispartof |
CSGR Working Paper No. 281/17 |
en_US |
|
dc.rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
|
|
dc.title |
Power, Ideas and Institutions: China's Emergent Footprints in Global Governance of Development Aid |
en_US |
|
dc.type |
Report |
|
|
utslib.location |
University of Warwick |
en_US |
|
pubs.embargo.period |
Not known |
en_US |
|
pubs.organisational-group |
/University of Technology Sydney |
|
|
pubs.organisational-group |
/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences |
|
|
pubs.organisational-group |
/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/Social and Political Sciences Program |
|
|
utslib.copyright.status |
open_access |
* |
|
pubs.consider-herdc |
true |
en_US |
|
pubs.commissioning-body |
Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation |
en_US |
|
pubs.confidential |
false |
en_US |
|
pubs.place-of-publication |
University of Warwick |
en_US |
|
pubs.rights-statement |
This report was invited and published by the University of Warwick’s Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation to explore China’s emergent footprints in global governance of development aid. In the context of the newly established China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in 2016, and an ongoing debate about whether China will soon replace the United States as a global hegemon, the report investigates whether China possesses the normative power to challenge liberal norms on how development aid should be given. It proceeds from a proposition that a hegemon, backed by material power preponderance, wields global power through socially recognized norms, rules and institutions. The competing social norms and institutions underpinning the report are political conditionality and the tying of aid, and the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the AIIB. The report found that there is a tendency towards a coalescence of Chinese and Western norms and practices, albeit not predicated on good governance. With pressing concerns over security threats, Beijing is re-interpreting its non-interference norm and practice into accepting tacitly a political conditionality approach. China’s ability to project its own norm on tied aid is, however, restrained by the multilateralism of the AIIB. The real machine that China would use to espouse normative changes in international development is its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, while BRI is institutionally shielded from international scrutiny and thus grants China more autonomy to operate, it could give China less normative power to set global standards and to define what passes for ‘normal’ in world politics. The research findings of this report serve as an addition to the ongoing debate about the intention and aspiration of an ascending and expansionist China, and the extent to which it could shape the norms and rules in global governance of development aid. |
en_US |
|
pubs.rights-statement |
FOR (1606) This report was invited and published by the University of Warwick’s Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation to explore China’s emergent footprints in global governance of development aid. In the context of the newly established China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in 2016, and an ongoing debate about whether China will soon replace the United States as a global hegemon, the report investigates whether China possesses the normative power to challenge liberal norms on how development aid should be given. It proceeds from a proposition that a hegemon, backed by material power preponderance, wields global power through socially recognized norms, rules and institutions. The competing social norms and institutions underpinning the report are political conditionality and the tying of aid, and the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the AIIB. The report found that there is a tendency towards a coalescence of Chinese and Western norms and practices, albeit not predicated on good governance. With pressing concerns over security threats, Beijing is re-interpreting its non-interference norm and practice into accepting tacitly a political conditionality approach. China’s ability to project its own norm on tied aid is, however, restrained by the multilateralism of the AIIB. The real machine that China would use to espouse normative changes in international development is its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, while BRI is institutionally shielded from international scrutiny and thus grants China more autonomy to operate, it could give China less normative power to set global standards and to define what passes for ‘normal’ in world politics. The research findings of this report serve as an addition to the ongoing debate about the intention and aspiration of an ascending and expansionist China, and the extent to which it could shape the norms and rules in global governance of development aid. |
en_US |
