How China's 'trade not aid' strategy became construed as charitable help: deconstructing the 'touching' idyll of Li Li's investment in Africa
In recent years, China has increased investments in Africa and its “Trade Not Aid” model appears to be the best delivery of sustainable assistance. By reviewing the history of Chinese aid to Africa, examining race-relations literature, and deconstructing contemporary models of aid, the author argues that, at least in terms of agricultural endeavors, China’s current approach resembles the colonialism that it once sought to disassemble. T have been many arguments against traditional patterns of aid to Africa. In 2009, Dambisa Moyo provided one of the most recent and prominent rationales, asserting that trade-based economic relationships encourage investment, production, as well as technical knowledge exchange, which therefore provides the effectiveness and sustainability that are lacking in traditional aid projects.1 This “ Trade Not Aid ” approach has become synonymous with contemporary China-Africa economic relations, and as it enhances its investments in Africa, China is also winning Moyo’s praise as Africa’s best friend.2 Nonetheless, a closer inspection of their relationship reveals that, at least in terms of agricultural investment, China’s strategy is not as radical of a departure from colonialism as the existing literature would suggest. This paper takes Li Li’s Jonken Farm situated in Moyo’s home — Zambia — as a case study to explore the dichotomy between perceptions of aid providers and recipients. Li and her husband Wang Chi built Jonken Farm in 1992. Their story first became known in a 2004 television interview,3 and after 2 How China’s “ Trade Not Aid ” Strategy Became Construed As Charitable Help Li assumed the management of the 3573-hectare farm when Wang passed away in 2005, she became a national celebrity in China. Beijing crowned Li with titles such as “the Chinese who touches Africa the most”, “National Heroine”, and “Distinguished Communist.” She was also mentioned in two important English-language publications on the Sino-African relationship. Basing herself on Jonken, Deborah Brautigam concludes that Li’s private investment generates profit as well as employment opportunities for locals.4 Serge Michel and Michel Beuret add that trade-based relationships buffer interracial discontent in ways aid does not; despite recent anti-Chinese revolts in Zambia, they find that Jonken is described as “a perfect example of the cooperation between China and Zambia”5. I deconstruct the Jonken story in the context of Beijing’s agricultural endeavors in Africa since 1960. Chinese assistance to Africa began with altruistic roots, but these have been lost over time even though Chinese media frames investments as “help” to its former aid recipients so it appears that China has not discontinued any aid. While Chinese perceive the contemporary business relationships as assistance, however, “aid” recipients often do not; while Beijing paints Li as a national hero, Zambians find her a bigoted and harsh. Despite investments being more efficient than traditional forms of aid, the racism that has accompanied the capitalism foretells grave risks in the future of Sino-African relations.
Pushing the Limits: International Land Acquisitions in Comparative Perspective
.................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................. iii List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................. 5 List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... 13 List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... 14 Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................ 15 1. The Project ....................................................................................................................... 15 2. The “Land Grabbing” Debate and Research Puzzle ........................................................ 22 3. The Research Objective and Approach ............................................................................ 35 4. Methodological Issues ..................................................................................................... 38 Database and Data Collection .......................................................................................... 39 Methodological Approach ................................................................................................ 45 Case Selection .................................................................................................................. 53 Comparative Political Economy, OFDI and Home Country Development ..................... 56 Objectivity in Social Science ........................................................................................... 64 5. Synopsis of Key Findings ................................................................................................ 66 6. Structure of the Thesis ..................................................................................................... 76 Chapter 2: International Land Acquisitions Today – The Debate Since 2008 ........................ 79
The development of biological systematics : Antoine-Laurent de Jussieu, nature, and the natural system
A reevaluation of the history of biological systematics that discusses the formative years of the so-called natural system of classification in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Shows how classifications came to be treated as conventions; systematic practice was not linked to clearly articulated theory; there was general confusion over the "shape" of nature; botany, elements of natural history, and systematics were conflated; and systematics took a position near the bottom of the hierarchy of sciences.