全球公共产品视角下的中国国际发展合作

中国的对外援助事业随国际、国内形势而变化。近年来官方对国际发展合作的重视不仅促成中国对外援助指导思想的转变,也为对外援助向国际发展合作转型奠定了理念基础。中国为发展合作提供全球公共产品的实践不断丰富:一是基于本国成功经验而开展的减贫国际合作成为重要公共产品,二是通过创新农业技术合作方式为解决全球粮食安全问题提供更多公共产品,三是借助三方合作更好地创新公共产品供给模式,四是持续加强全球卫生公共产品供给。中国对外援助在取得积极成效的同时,也面临经济、技术实力有限、援助项目可持续性不足、受援国国家治理与互不干涉内政之间协调困难、国际发展合作的话语权有待提升等挑战。未来,中国应注重从制度建设、资金筹集、可持续性提升、受援国能动性发挥、国际话语权提升等方面做更充分准备。     

Recalcitrant spoiler? Contesting dominant accounts of India’s role in global trade governance

India is frequently cast as a troublemaker and blamed for the breakdown of the Doha Round. This article provides a critical re-reading of India’s trade policy and its position in multilateral trade negotiations. It challenges the widespread characterisation of India as a recalcitrant spoiler, intent on derailing trade liberalisation at the WTO. It shows that with the emergence of its highly-competitive, export-oriented services sector, India became one of the leading advocates of global services trade liberalisation in the Doha Round. Yet, not unlike the traditional powers, India’s offensive trade interests are also combined with significant defensive concerns in agriculture.     

当代国际体系的渐变和嬗变--基于两个三十年的比较与思考

当前国际体系正处于新旧交替和质变飞跃的过渡期,筹划和推动新的国际体系建设是事关国际政治经济发展的重大问题。冷战结束以来三十年的国际体系延续和发展了二战后国际体系的主体框架,处于突变后的渐变过程,世界在“后冷战体系”和“前多极体系”之间探索和徘徊。越来越多的非西方国家在批判过时的国际关系理论,国际社会作为一个整体也在扶正祛邪中不断促进国际体系朝着更加公正、合理的方向前进。未来三十年世界将开启东西方力量相对平衡和世界多极化基本稳定的新时期,这一进程大体上与中国的第二个百年奋斗目标同步推进,国际体系将从后冷战转型期朝着构建新型国际关系和人类命运共同体的方向演进,并最终成熟定型。中国在逐步走近世界舞台中央的历史进程中,应注重加强国际体系理论建设,准确把握国际社会的主要矛盾。解决各自的发展问题和国际社会的共同挑战,对公平正义的普遍需求和供给的相对不足将越来越成为国际社会发展的主要矛盾。中国要着力解答当前和未来的时代命题,勾勒国际体系改革基本架构,进而促进和平、发展、合作、共赢的时代潮流不断向前,推动实现公正、共同富裕的新时代目标。     

Public–private partnerships (ppps) in global health: the good,the bad and the ugly

Global Health Partnerships (ghps) have become ubiquitous within global health governance (ghg). Even before the onset of the global financial crisis public–private partnerships (ppps) were an omnipresent policy tool in global health and in the current austerity climate ppps have been heralded as an effective way to address a growing resource gap in ghg. Despite their omnipresence, ghps have not received adequate attention from critical scholars; few efforts have been made conceptually and theoretically to grasp how ppps are transforming the logic of ghg. We argue that ghps have contributed to the emergence of a complex global health governance architecture in which private solutions (market mechanism) are generally privileged over public approaches. Drawing on Gramscian conceptualisations of public/private, we suggest that the reshaping of the private and public realm inherent to ppps represents a further deepening of the neoliberal management of individuals and populations, allowing private interest to become more embedded within the public sphere and to influence global and national health policy making. This undermines the attempt to improve global health results as the inequitable distribution of social determinants of health, especially poverty and social exclusion, remain the main barriers to achieving health for all.     

国际碳交易机制复杂化及中国应对

目前,国际碳交易机制网络群体呈现复杂化态势,碳交易机制复合体、碳交易机制集群与碳交易机制联结相互渗透,同时其内部也进行着良性协同、建设性合作与功能性竞争的有序互动。在无政府状态、利益认知差异以及全球气候治理体系转型等普遍性因素影响下,国际碳交易机制复杂化的成因有着自身的特殊性,是其发展进程中的必然产物。另外,国际碳交易机制间的互动具有双重效应,其协同合作将会带来经济发展与气候保护的双赢结果,而如果互相掣肘则会增加碳交易成本甚至造成负减排。因此,中国在复杂化的国际碳交易机制中推进新型碳外交并实现碳中和目标,既需要充分发挥自身团结国际力量的优势以及国内和国际双循环新发展格局的核心作用,促进碳交易机制间的协同与衔接,又要积极践行《巴黎协定》关于碳交易机制整合的倡议,与各国及相关国际组织共同将碳交易机制整合的规范推广到整个国际社会以及其他议题的全球治理之中。     

Economic Transition in Latin American and Post-Communist Countries: A Comparison of Multilateral Development Banks

This article examines regional development banks and their relationship with the World Bank. Specifically, the article analyzes the roles of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the factors that have influenced the creation of these international financial institutions. Most of the literature examines regional development banking practices and development strategies as if all regional banks were the same. However, the missions of the IDB and the EBRD are quite distinct. While the IDB primarily provides social sector loans to nation-states, the EBRD primarily provides private sector loans for finance and business development. Given that Latin America and the former Soviet Union share many of the same economic, political and social problems, it is surprising that these institutions are so different. What accounts for the different missions of these regional banks? We find that the influence of borrowing and non-borrowing member states in the creation of these banks can help explain some of the differences between the IDB and the EBRD.     

Norm-making,norm-taking or norm-shifting? A case study of Sino–Japanese competition in the Jakarta–Bandung high-speed rail project

This paper’s main aim is to contribute to the debate on the impact of China’s rise on the established norms and practices in the field of international development. To do so, it zooms in on a single infrastructure project, the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed rail line, which involved intense competition between China and Japan. Specifically, it examines how competition between China, a non-Western emerging power, and Japan, an OECD member, led to a recalibration of both China and Japan’s approaches to infrastructure financing in the region. The findings suggest that rather than straight convergence or competition between diverging models, there is an ongoing process of two-way adjustment between China, and representatives of the dominant global norms and practices. We also argue that to understand the implications of China’s participation in the field of international development, and its impact on the ‘rules of the game’ of global governance, researchers should avoid positioning inquiries within the premises of China’s one-directional impact on the development assistance regime. Rather, it is necessary to take into account a complex set of relationships including China, host countries and other ‘socialised’ actors, and the process of negotiation between them.     

The globaliser dragon: how is China changing economic globalisation?

There are many studies on the effects of both economic globalisation and the rise of China. These core issues of the contemporary international agenda entail major economic, military, environmental, social and cultural transformations in most nations. While there is also an abundant literature on how globalisation supported the rise of China, there are scarce publications on how China became one of the primary drivers of globalisation. This article assumes that understanding the power of globalisation over countries is as crucial as assessing the power of certain countries over the process. In this sense, it uses the recently created ‘theory of globalisers’ to analyse how is China transforming contemporary economic globalisation. The conclusion is that China became an ‘economic globaliser’ in the twenty-first century. As the largest exporter, the second largest importer, the third largest provider of foreign direct investments, and a major supplier of high-tech goods, the Asian giant is a vital partner for several economies in different continents. In this context, Beijing’s globalisation strategy aims at both securing the benefits of globalisation and reforming the international economic order, but without a revolutionary stance.     

Rethinking global governance: a China model in the making?

This paper examines Chinese perspectives on global governance, an area in which China has increased substantially the depth and breadth of its participation. The paper attempts to draw a mainstream perspective to inform our understanding of some key aspects of China's foreign policy. It demonstrates that while China's statist preference appeals to some Third World countries, such a preference leads the country to clash with the West over how to tackle global issues collectively, particularly over humanitarian intervention. While the Chinese perspective is in the process of evolving and far from reaching maturity, it is questionable whether the global community led by the West would find the Westphalian practice that China embraces admirable.