华盛顿共识与北京模式在非洲的和解

S. Asongu, Jacinta C. Nwachukwu
{"title":"华盛顿共识与北京模式在非洲的和解","authors":"S. Asongu, Jacinta C. Nwachukwu","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2786244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we argue that an approach which will reconcile the two opposing camps in Sino-African relations and bring the most progress is a “middle passage” that greases contradictions and offers an accommodative, balanced and pragmatic vision on which Africans can unite. We present a case under which countries can substantially enhance the prospect of development if an African consensus builds on a merger between the Western and Chinese models. We balance national interest with human rights, sovereign authority with individual rights and economic goals with political rights. The chapter presents arguments on the need for a development paradigm in Africa that reconciles the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model. The analytical framework is organised in three main strands, notably: (i) historical perspectives and contemporary views; (ii) reconciliation of dominant schools of thought and paradigms surrounding Sino-African relations and (iii) practical and contemporary implications. Reconciled schools of thought are engaged in four main categories: optimists versus (vs.) pessimists; preferences in rights (human vs. national, idiosyncratic vs. sovereign and political vs. economic) and the Beijing model vs. the Washington Consensus.","PeriodicalId":118088,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reconciliation of the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model in Africa\",\"authors\":\"S. Asongu, Jacinta C. Nwachukwu\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2786244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this study, we argue that an approach which will reconcile the two opposing camps in Sino-African relations and bring the most progress is a “middle passage” that greases contradictions and offers an accommodative, balanced and pragmatic vision on which Africans can unite. We present a case under which countries can substantially enhance the prospect of development if an African consensus builds on a merger between the Western and Chinese models. We balance national interest with human rights, sovereign authority with individual rights and economic goals with political rights. The chapter presents arguments on the need for a development paradigm in Africa that reconciles the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model. The analytical framework is organised in three main strands, notably: (i) historical perspectives and contemporary views; (ii) reconciliation of dominant schools of thought and paradigms surrounding Sino-African relations and (iii) practical and contemporary implications. Reconciled schools of thought are engaged in four main categories: optimists versus (vs.) pessimists; preferences in rights (human vs. national, idiosyncratic vs. sovereign and political vs. economic) and the Beijing model vs. the Washington Consensus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":118088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-03-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2786244\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2786244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本研究中,我们认为,调和中非关系中两个对立阵营并带来最大进展的方法是“中间通道”,它可以消除矛盾,并提供一个包容、平衡和务实的愿景,使非洲人能够团结起来。我们提出了一个案例,在这个案例中,如果非洲的共识建立在西方和中国模式合并的基础上,各国可以大大提高发展的前景。我们平衡国家利益与人权、主权权威与个人权利、经济目标与政治权利。本章论述了非洲需要一种协调“华盛顿共识”与“北京模式”的发展模式。分析框架分为三个主要部分,特别是:(i)历史观点和当代观点;(二)调和围绕中非关系的主要思想流派和范式;(三)现实和当代意义。调和学派主要分为四类:乐观主义者和悲观主义者;在权利方面的偏好(人权vs国家、特质vs主权、政治vs经济),以及北京模式vs华盛顿共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reconciliation of the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model in Africa
In this study, we argue that an approach which will reconcile the two opposing camps in Sino-African relations and bring the most progress is a “middle passage” that greases contradictions and offers an accommodative, balanced and pragmatic vision on which Africans can unite. We present a case under which countries can substantially enhance the prospect of development if an African consensus builds on a merger between the Western and Chinese models. We balance national interest with human rights, sovereign authority with individual rights and economic goals with political rights. The chapter presents arguments on the need for a development paradigm in Africa that reconciles the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model. The analytical framework is organised in three main strands, notably: (i) historical perspectives and contemporary views; (ii) reconciliation of dominant schools of thought and paradigms surrounding Sino-African relations and (iii) practical and contemporary implications. Reconciled schools of thought are engaged in four main categories: optimists versus (vs.) pessimists; preferences in rights (human vs. national, idiosyncratic vs. sovereign and political vs. economic) and the Beijing model vs. the Washington Consensus.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信