The Multilateral EU-China Dialogue on Africa within the OECD

  • Anna Katharina Stahl
Chapter
Part of the The European Union in International Affairs book series (EUIA)

Abstract

Chapter 4 is dedicated to the study of multilateral EU engagement with China on Africa. Based on the particular case of the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC), the chapter focuses on the EU’s efforts to involve China in two multilateral development initiatives: the China-DAC Study Group and the Busan Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation.

References

  1. Abdel-Malek, T. (2015), “The Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation: Origins, Actions and Future Prospects”, die Studies 88, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  2. Ashoff, G. (2013), “50 Years of Peer Reviews by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee: instrument of Quality Assurance and Mutual Learning”, die Briefing Paper 12/2013, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  3. Atwood, J. B. (2012), “Creating a Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation”, Essay, Washington D.C.: Centre for Global Development (cgdev), October 2012, available at: http://www.cgdev.org/files/1426543_file_Atwood_Busan_FINAL.pdf
  4. Birdsall, N. (2011), “Aid Alert: China Officially Joins the Donor Club”, Global Development: View from the Centre, Washington D.C.: Centre for Global Development.Google Scholar
  5. Boas, M. and D. McNeill (2004), Global Institutions and Development: Framing the World?, London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bräutigam, D. (2010), “China, Africa and the International Aid Architecture”, Working Paper Series N°107, Tunis: African Development Bank (AfdB).Google Scholar
  7. Carbone, M. (2015), Ambition with credibility: explaining (variation of) EU effectiveness in international development negotiations, Paper presented at the European Union Studies Association (EUSA) Fourteenth Biennial Conference, Boston, 5–7 March 2015, available at: https://eustudies.org/conference/11.
  8. Carroll, P. and A. Kellow (2011), The OECD: A Study of Organisational Adaptation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll, P. and A. Kellow (2013), “The OECD”, in K. E. Jorgensen and K. V. Laatikainen (eds.), Routledge Handbook on the European Union and International Institutions: Performance, Policy, Power, Abingdon and Oxon: Routledge, pp. 247–258.Google Scholar
  10. Castillejo, C. (2013), “Engaging China on development”, FRIDE Policy Brief n° 151, Madrid: FRIDE.Google Scholar
  11. Chahoud, T. (2008), “Serie Entwicklungsfinanzierung: Neue Geber in der Entwicklungskooperation”, die Analysen und Stellungnahmen 13/2008, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  12. Clifton, J. and D. Diaz-Fuentes (2011a), “From ‘Club of the Rich’ to ‘globalization à la carte’: On the Successes and Limits of the Reform at the OECD”, Global Policy, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 300–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clifton, J. and D. Diaz-Fuentes (2011b), “The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 1961–2011: Challenges for the Next 50 Years”, Global Policy, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 297–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Clifton, J. and D. Diez-Fuentes (2011c), “The OECD and Phases in the International Political Economy, 1961–2011”, Review of International Political Economy, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 552–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. CONCORD (2012), “EU sidelined at Busan Aid Summit”, 1 September 2012, Brussels: Concord, available at: http://old.concordeurope.org/shaping-development-policy/development-effectivness/item/118-eu-at-busan-summit
  16. CONCORD and AidWatch (2011), “CONCORD AidWatch reaction to the European Commission’s Communication Proposal for the EU Common Position for the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan”, Open Forum for CSO Development Effectiveness, September 2011, Brussels: CONCORD, available at: http://www.cso-effectiveness.org/IMG/pdf/aw_reaction_to_ec_communication_final.pdf
  17. CONCORD and AidWatch (2012), “Making Sense of EU Development Cooperation Effectiveness, Concord AidWatch Special Report on the post-Busan development effectiveness agenda”, Brussels: CONCORD, 27 November 2012, available at: http://www.concordeurope.org/187-aidwatch-special-report-2012
  18. Cornelli, M. and R. Matarazzo (2011), “Rehashed Commission Delegations or Real Embassies? EU Delegations Post-Lisbon”, IAI Working Papers 11/23, Rome: Instituto Affari Internazionali (IAI).Google Scholar
  19. Council of the EU (2011), Council Conclusions, EU Common Position for the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Brussels, 14 November 2011.Google Scholar
  20. Craig-McQuaide, P., N. Costello and N. Köhler (2011), “Towards a truly global partnership for development”, Trade Negotiations Insights, vol. 10, no. 3, Maastricht: European Centre for Development Management (ecdpm), pp. 2–4.Google Scholar
  21. Davies, P. (2008), “Aid Effectiveness and Non-DAC Providers of Development Assistance”, Consultative Findings Document for the Informal Working Group on non-DAC Providers of Development Assistance, Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Accra, 2–4 September 2008, available at: http://www.ipc-undp.org/publications/southlearning/penny.pdf
  22. Deutscher, E. (2010), 10 Theses on the Future of Development Co-operation, Office of the DAC Chair, DAC/CHAIR(2010)7, Paris: OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC), 16 December 2010.Google Scholar
  23. DFID (2012), Press release: UK International Development Secretary visit Beijing, London, 29 November 2011.Google Scholar
  24. Elgström, O. and M. Strömvik (2003), “The EU as an International Negotiator”, Paper presented at the Eighth Biennial International Conference of the European Union Studies Association, Nashville, Tennessee, 27–29 March 2003, available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/6483/1/001526_1.PDF
  25. European Commission (2011d), Proposal for the EU Common Position for the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, COM(2011)541 final, Brussels, 7.9.2011.Google Scholar
  26. Eyben, R. (2011), “Enabling Effective Development. What Goes On Inside DAC Spaces and Where Cares?”, Paper present at the LSE Workshop “Unpacking Foreign Aid Effectiveness”, London: London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), 21 June 2011, available at: http://aidconference.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/eyben-paper.pdf
  27. Eyben, R. (2012), “Struggle in Paris: The DAC and the Purposes of Development Aid”, European Journal of Development Research, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fejerskov, A. M. and N. Keijzer (2013), “Practice Makes Perfect? The European Union’s Engagement in Negotiations on a Post-2015 Framework for Development”, DIIS Report 2013:04, Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS).Google Scholar
  29. Freitas, R. and L. Mah (2012), “European responses to Asia’s enhanced role as an aid donor”, CIES e-Working Paper n° 132/2012, Centre de investigacao e estudos de sociologia (CIES), Lisbon: Instituto Universitario de Lisboa (IUL).Google Scholar
  30. Gurría, A. (2011), “The OECD at 50: Past Achievements, Present Challenges and Future Directions”, Global Policy, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 318–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hackenesch, C. and S. Grimm (2011), “Busan and the “new actors”: the story path to a shared understanding of effective development policy”, The Current Column, 17 October 2011, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  32. Hayman, R. (2009), “From Rome to Accra via Kigali: ‘Aid Effectiveness’ in Rwanda”, Development Policy Review, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 581–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hoffmeister, F. (2007), “Outsider or Frontrunner? Recent Developments under International and European Law on the Status of the European Union in International Organizations and Treaty Bodies”, Common Market Law Review, vol. 44, pp. 41–68.Google Scholar
  34. IPRCC and OECD (2009), The China-DAC Study Group. Sharing experiences and promoting learning about growth and poverty reduction in China and Africa countries, Draft concept note by Li Xiaoyun and Michael Laird, Paris and Beijing.Google Scholar
  35. Janus, H., S. Klingebiel and T. C. Mahn, eds. (2014), “How to Shape Development Cooperation? The Global Partnership and the Development Cooperation Forum”, Briefing Paper 3/2014, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  36. JICA (2012), An Overview of South-South Cooperation and Triangular Cooperation, February 2012, Tokyo: Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).Google Scholar
  37. John de Sousa, S-L. (2010), “Brazil as an Emerging Actor in International Development Cooperation: A Good Partner for European Donors?”, die Briefing Paper 5/2010, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (die).Google Scholar
  38. Jorgensen, K. E. and K. V. Laatikainen (2013), Routledge Handbook on the European Union and International Institutions, Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Kaczynski, P. M. (2010), “Single voice, single chair? How to reorganize the EU in international negotiations under the Lisbon rules”, CEPS Policy Brief No. 207, March 2010, Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS).Google Scholar
  40. Keijzer, N. (2011), “Offense is the Best Defense? The EU’s Past and Future Engagement in Promoting Effective Development Cooperation: Ideas for Busan”, Ecdpm Briefing Note 30, Maastricht: European Centre for Development Management (ecdpm).Google Scholar
  41. Kharas, H. (2007), “Trends and Issues in Development Aid”, Working Paper 1, November 2007, Washington D.C: Wolfensohn Center for Development and Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  42. Kharas, H. (2012), “The Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation”, Policy Paper 2012–04, Global Views, Global Economy and Development, June 2012, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  43. Kragelund, P. (2011b), “The Potential Role of Non-Traditional Donors’ Aid in Africa”, Issue Paper No.11, Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
  44. Li, X. and R. Carey (2014), “The BRIC and the International Development System: Challenge and Convergence”, Evidence Report No. 58, Rising Powers in International Development, Brighton: Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Sussex.Google Scholar
  45. Mahbubani, K. (2012), “The OECD: A Classic Sunset Organisation”, Global Policy, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 117–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mahon, R. and S. McBride (2008), The OECD and Transnational Governance, Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  47. Manning, R. (2006), “Will ‘Emerging Donors’ Change the Face of International Co-operation?”, Development Policy Review, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 371–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Manning, R. (2008), “The DAC as a Central Actor in Development Policy Issues: Experiences over the Past Four Years”, DIE Discussion Paper 7/2008, Bonn: Deutsches Institute für Entwicklungsppolitik (die).Google Scholar
  49. Martens, K. and A. P. Jakobi (2010a), “Introduction: The OECD as an Actor in International Politics”, in K. Martens and A. P. Jakobi (eds.), Mechanisms of OECD Governance: International Incentives for National Policy-Making?, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Martens, K. and A. P. Jakobi (2010b), Mechanisms of OECD Governance: International Incentives for National Policy-Making?, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mawdsley, E. (2012b), From Recipients to Donors: Emerging Powers and the Changing Development Landscape, London and New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  52. Mawdsley, E., L. Savage and S. M. Kim (2013), “A ‘Post-Aid World”? Paradigm Shift in Foreign Aid and Development Cooperation at the 2011 Busan High Level Forum”, The Geographic Journal, vol. 179, no. 4, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  53. Mehta, P. S. and N. Nanda (2005), “Trilateral Development Cooperation: An Emerging Trend”, CUTS-CITEE Briefing Paper No.1/2005, Jaipur: CUTS Centre for International Trade, Economics & Environment.Google Scholar
  54. OECD (1960), Convention on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  55. OECD (2003), Rome Declaration on Harmonisation, High-Level Forum on Harmonization, Rome, 24–25 February 2003.Google Scholar
  56. OECD (2005a), The DAC Outreach Strategy, DCD/DAC(2005)18/REV1, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD), Paris, 29 June 2005.Google Scholar
  57. OECD (2005c), The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, Paris, 28 February - 2 March 2005.Google Scholar
  58. OECD (2006), DAC in Dates: The History of the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee, Paris: OECD Publication Service.Google Scholar
  59. OECD (2007a), Council Resolution on Enlargement and Enhanced Engagement, C/MIN(2007)4/FINAL, Council at Ministerial Level, Paris, 16 May 2007.Google Scholar
  60. OECD (2007b), Deepening Enhanced Engagement: Guidelines to Committees, C(2010)100/FINAL, Council at Ministerial Level, Paris, 7 December 2010.Google Scholar
  61. OECD (2007c), The OECD’s Global Relations Programme 2007–2008, CCNM(2007)2, Centre for Co-operation with Non-Members (CCNM), Paris.Google Scholar
  62. OECD (2008a), Accra Agenda for Action, Third High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Accra, 2–4 September 2008.Google Scholar
  63. OECD (2008b), The DAC Outreach Strategy: Revision of Outreach to non-DAC Donors in the Light of OECD Enlargement and Enhanced Engagement, DCD/DAC(2008)22/REV1, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD), Paris, 7 May 2008.Google Scholar
  64. OECD (2008c), Establishing a China-DAC Study Group, DCD/DIR(2008)19, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD), Paris, 1 October 2008.Google Scholar
  65. OECD (2008e), Strategic Reflexion Exercise: Progress Report, DCD/DAC(2008)60, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD), Paris, 26 November 2008.Google Scholar
  66. OECD (2008f), Summary of the workshop on “Reducing Poverty and Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: China’s Experience in Rural Poverty Reduction at Home and in Africa”, DCD/DCA/POVNET/M(2008)2, DAC Network on Poverty Reduction (POVNET), Paris, 28 February 2008.Google Scholar
  67. OECD (2009a), 2008 DAC Report on Multilateral Aid, Paris: Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD).Google Scholar
  68. OECD (2009b), DAC Relection Exercise - Investing in Development: A Common Cause in a Changing World, Paris: Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD) and Development Assistance Committee (DAC).Google Scholar
  69. OECD (2011a), African Economic Outlook 2011, “Special Theme: Africa and its Emerging Partners”, Paris: African Development Bank Group, Development Centre, UNDP, Economic Commission for Africa, EU/ACP.Google Scholar
  70. OECD (2011b), Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation, Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, 29 November, 1 December 2011.Google Scholar
  71. OECD (2011c), Compendium of Written Proposals Received Based on the Third Draft Outcome Document for HLF-4, Meeting of the Group of HLF-4 outcome document Sherpas, Paris, 4 November 2011.Google Scholar
  72. OECD (2011d), DAC Global Relations Strategy, DCD/DAC(2011)36/FINAL, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD) and Development Assistance Committee (DAC), Paris, 23 November 2011.Google Scholar
  73. OECD (2011e), Fifth Draft Outcome Document for The Fourth High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, Korea, 29 November - 1 December 2011”, Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD), Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and Working Party on Aid Effectiveness (EFF), DCD/DAC/EFF(2011)18, Paris, 23 November 2011.Google Scholar
  74. OECD (2012a), Directory of Bodies of the OECD, July 2012, Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).Google Scholar
  75. OECD (2012b), European Union DAC Peer Review 2012, Paris: Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD).Google Scholar
  76. OECD (2012c), OECD Strategy on Development, Council at Ministerial Level, Paris, 23–24 May 2012.Google Scholar
  77. OECD (2012d), The OECD’s Relations with its Key Partners, Council at Ministerial Level, Paris 23–24 May 2012.Google Scholar
  78. Ougaard, M. (2010), “The OECD’s Global Role: Agenda-Setting and Policy Diffusion”, in K. Martens and A. P. Jakobi (eds.), Mechanisms of OECD Governance: International Incentives for National Policy-Making? Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 26–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pagani, F. (2002), Peer Review: A Tool for Co-operation and Change, An Analysis of an OECD Working Method, Directorate for Legal Affairs (LEG), OECD, Paris, 11 September 2002.Google Scholar
  80. Paulo, S. and H. Reisen (2010), “Eastern Donors and Western Soft Law: Towards a DAC Donor Peer Review of China and India”, Development Policy Review, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 535–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Reisen, H. (2009), “The Multilateral Donor Non-System: Towards Accountability and Efficient Role Assignment”, Economics, Nr. 2009–18.Google Scholar
  82. Ruckert, A. (2008), “Making Neo-Gramscian Sense of the DAC: Towards an Inclusive-Neoliberal World Development Order”, in R. Mahon and S. McBride (eds.), The OECD and Transnational Governance, Vancouver: UBC Press, pp. 96–113.Google Scholar
  83. Sabathil, G. (2014), “New and Old Donors: Complementing or Competing Approaches To Development – An European View”, Discussion Paper, 8th Berlin Conference on Asian Security (BCAS) “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility” 100 years after World War I – Pathways to a secure Asia, Berlin, 22–24 June 2014.Google Scholar
  84. Sauvat, V. (2002), “The Development of the Centre”, in J. B. d. Macedo, C. Foy and C. P. Oman (eds.), Development is Back, Development Centre Studies, Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, pp. 9–28.Google Scholar
  85. Schricke, C. (1989), “La CEE et l’OCDE à l’heure de l’Acte Unique”, Revue Générale de Droit International Public, vol. 93, pp. 802–829.Google Scholar
  86. Stahl, A. K. (2013), “Fostering African Development, Governance and Security through Multilateral Cooperation between China and Western Donors: The Case of the China-DAC Study Group”, in M. G. Berhe and L. Hongwu (eds.), China-Africa Relations: Governance, Peace and Security, Addis Ababa: Institute for Peace and Security Studies (IPSS) of Addis Ababa University and the Institute of African Studies (IAS) of the Zhejiang Normal University (ZNU), pp. 74–96.Google Scholar
  87. Stähle, S. (2008), “Towards China’s Integration into the Aid Donor Architecture: Learning from Chinese Participation in International Regimes”, China aktuell 3/2008, pp. 131–163.Google Scholar
  88. Torney, D. (2015), European Climate Leadership in Question: Policies Toward China and India, Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Verschaeve, J. and T. Takacs (2013), “The EU’s International Identity: The Curious Case of the OECD”, in H. d. Waele and J. J. Kuipers (eds.), The European Union’s Emerging International Identity: View from the Global Arena, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, pp. 187–210.Google Scholar
  90. Wolfe, R. (2008), “From Reconstructing Europe to Constructing Globalization: The OECD in Historical Perspective”, in R. Mahon and S. McBride (eds.), The OECD and Transnational Governance, Vancouver: UBC Press, pp. 25–42.Google Scholar
  91. Woodward, R. (2009), The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  92. Woodward, R. (2011), “Fifty More Years? Reform and Modernisation of the OECD”, Political Insight, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Xu, J. (2012), “The Anatomy of China’s Influence on the International Development Finance System”, RCCPB Working Paper, Research Centre for Chinese Politics and Business (RCCPB), Indiana University, at: http://www.indiana.edu/~rccpb/pdf/Xu RCCPB 28 Aid June 2012.pdf

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Katharina Stahl
    • 1
  1. 1.College of EuropeBrugesBelgium

Personalised recommendations