Flexigemony and Force in China's Resource Diplomacy in Africa

Sudan and Zambia Compared

Datos Bibliográficos

ID3948367
AutoresPadraig Carmody (0000-0001-8699-703X, Trinity College Dublin, autor de correspondencia), Ian Taylor (0000-0002-8721-3759, University of St Andrews)
Año2010
Volumen15
Número3
Páginas496-515
Fecha de publicación2010-08-19
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaGeopolitics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1465-0045 • E-ISSN: 1557-3028
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/14650040903501047
OpenAlexW1993863852
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas40

The Chinese government and its companies have dramatically increased their presence in Africa in the last decade. There has been much media interest and commentary on the impacts of this engagement on governance in Africa, as it is often seen to be strengthening authoritarian states, such Sudan and Zimbabwe. 1 1. G. Arrighi, Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty First Century (New York and London: Verso 2007). However, Chinese actors are also engaging with more democratic states and spaces, such as Zambia. This article seeks to explore the impacts of increased Chinese engagement with Africa on governance through a comparative case study of two contrasting cases: Sudan and Zambia, using the concept of flexigemony. Contrary to popular perception, behaviour by Chinese actors has sometimes been a moderating force in Sudan, while provoking violence in Zambia

Authoritarianism · Beijing · China · Corporate governance · Democracy · Democratic governance · Development economics · Diplomacy · Economic growth · Economics · Geography · Management · Political science · Politics · Socioeconomics · Sociology · Tanzania · China's Global Influence and Migration · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Development and Aid · Law