Smogvelopment – China’s smog and the cost to be the boss

Jan. 27, 2014 – Julian Hill

China’s bout with the ever-so-dangerous pollutant, PM 2.5, has reared its ugly head more than usual as of late, showing us the possible costs of “progress.”

I donned a mask right as I passed police officers guarding the entrance to Beijing’s subway system. “Only in China can a black man wear a mask without purse-clutching or visual displays of anxiety,” I though to myself. However, just look at the photo from one of my days in Beijing, and you’ll see just how needed that  anti-PM 2.5 mask was. Though at that time I knew I’d only need it for another month, I couldn’t help but wonder if substantial pollution, which has been an issue for other countries like the United States as they develop, has to be the cost of development.

Smog in China, which some believe annually causes the death of 350,000 folks, is linked largely with the country’s rising development over the past several decades. Since “opening up” its markets in 1978 under President Deng Xiaoping, China’s GDP averaged 10 % growth, allegedly lifting 500 million people from poverty. To accommodate this growth, the country has had to drastically increase its energy consumption (about half of the world’s coal supply) while measures for energy efficiency eroded.

China has not sat completely sat on its hands on this issue. In fact, China is the leading investor in green energy. Also, in 2009, the government did invest in tree planting.

However, the growth in smog may be explained by a number of factors. The devouring of non-renewable in spaces where there are neither enough trees to breakdown the byproducts of coal-burning nor enough wind to blow it away exacerbates a problem that is often epic around this time of the year.

Just how epic is the problem? The pollution has caused a debate around whether or not to use fireworks to celebrate the upcoming Spring Festival. During the festival in 2012, the levels of PM 2.5 at one point was 64 times what the EU recommends for an annual average—1,593. The government has even resorted to using huge monitors throughout the city to broadcast the sunrise.

Though a delicate topic, we should all be concerned. Of course, the U.S. government will act out of self-interest. I mean…hey…that’s what countries do, right? Perhaps knowing that folks in Los Angeles receive the gift of China’s smog quite often will help us think more seriously about how to move toward a future with safer, more efficient energy use. Otherwise, maybe you should save up for your masks now? I’ve got mine.

Battle for Foreign Direct Investment in Asia

Jan. 14, 2014 – Julian M. Hill

Asian countries positioning to attract more foreign capital, but at what cost?

Last month, E&Y (formally Ernst & Young) gave India an early Christmas present, apparently crowning India as the most attractive destination in the world for foreign direct investment (FDI). In the world, E&Y said! Besides its depreciating currency (at the time at least) and domestic companies divesting from homegrown entities, India’s liberalization of its FDI policy in August is likely a key reason for the country’s increasing appeal. The Indian government, for seven sectors, decided to increase the amount of FDI that could be contributed to companies and eliminate mandatory government approval, under certain circumstances, in five other sectors. Such broad liberalizations in FDI-governing laws are just one among other strategies being used by Asian countries to attract foreign money.

More targeted relaxations are being employed by Mongolia to encourage inbound FDI specifically from Chinese investors. Laos’s leadership also used a focused approach a few weeks ago to solicit more FDI from South Korea’s private sector during a trip to Seoul. Many Asian countries, like Laos, see FDI as an important contributor to economic growth and are not afraid to go out and get it.

Longer-term bilateral approaches in the form of bilateral treaties and co-operation agreements are continuously being drafted as well, as in the case of Malaysia and China. In October, the two countries reaffirmed agreements to bilaterally trade USD $160B over the next five years, agreements which also include terms centered on common defense and security cooperation.

With China’s economy growing and prices for labor and services increasing, countries like Cambodia and Vietnam are likely to attract investments that will exploit relatively lower related costs (Samsung made its move just this month). And so continues the race to the bottom, where multinational companies encourage countries to compete over them. The country that can deregulate the most, often at the expense of local industries, seems to win.

Infusing foreign capital into countries that need it is important—I’m no fool. The ugly side, though, cannot be ignored—displacement of politically weak communities, ignoring of labor rights, and the degradation of ecological systems among other problems. Luckily we can all just rely on it all trickling down right?  That’s if the goal is being poor and exploited with one job rather than being relatively less poor with no job.

Links for more information

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/xinhua-news-agency/131126/laos-seeks-foreign-direct-investment-s-korea

http://www.mad-mongolia.com/news/mongolia-news/mongolias-new-law-expected-to-attract-chinese-billions-2-16337/

http://blogs.wsj.com/searealtime/2013/10/05/china-malaysia-seek-to-strengthen-ties/

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2013/12/13/2003578891

http://www.dnaindia.com/money/interview-many-south-korean-companies-doing-surveys-to-invest-in-india-seok-gu-jang-1939923

[photo courtesy of ironline.american.edu]

China stepping up investments in East Africa

Dec. 6, 2013 – Julian M. Hill

China’s private sector increasingly active but not without backlash

At last Thursday’s Groundbreaking Ceremony, Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta said that “it” would be a “landmark project both for Kenya and east Africa.” The “it” to which he referred is a 450-kilometre railway that will connect the Kenyan cities Mombasa and Nairobi—Kenyatta anticipates that it will link all of East Africa by extending as far west as Kigali, Rwanda.

Chinese companies have funded this and other types of large-scale projects in Africa for years, developing the Continent’s energy infrastructure to the delight, or fright, of many. In East Africa, though, China’s private sector has become especially active in recent months.

At the end of October, six Chinese companies and the Tanzanian government signed seven contracts worth 1.7 billion USD to construct power plants and housing units. Just a month before, a Chinese energy company signed a deal with the Ugandan government to build a phosphate mine and power plant, while another firm, of the oil variety, also agreed to construct an oil field. September did not leave Burundi out of the loop—it invited Chinese companies to build a presidential palace and hydropower dam.

Not everyone is happy about these developments. For example, Ugandan civil society organizations have recently called out China to step up its contributions to the Global Fund, which works to eradicate AIDS, TB, and malaria. China, which pledged 5 million USD to the fund over the past year, has invested billions in infrastructure projects to Africa just this year.  Complicating this story is the fact that Chinese companies are doing some positive things in the region—joining UNICEF to provide mobile computer stations and sponsoring a Ugandan sports team just in the past week. 

If the question is one of priorities, it is clear that at the end of the day, China, like any country, has its own self-interests. Asking China to increase Global Fund donations is valuable, but what will be interesting to see is what strategies East Africa’s civil society will use to push its governments to ensure that the needs of everyday people are not forgotten. Does this mean pushing for transparency, accountability, sustainability, and real shared benefit (see new South Africa Resource Barometer), outright protest, or some other alternatives?  Regardless of approach, I hope they and their allies in East African nations learn from the lessons of their brethren elsewhere in Africa, and the world.

Useful Links

http://mobile.nation.co.ke/News/Kenya-launches–13-8bn-China-built-railway-to-boost-trade-/-/1950946/2092168/-/format/xhtml/-/qjg82wz/-/index.html

http://sleepout.com/nomad/president-uhuru-kenyatta-officially-launches-standard-gauge-railway-project-in-mombasa/

http://www.howwemadeitinafrica.com/chinas-investment-in-africa-is-positive-says-investment-advisor/33013/

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/24/tanzania-china-financing-idUSL5N0IE30U20131024

http://online.wsj.com/article/DN-CO-20130919-002993.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24279582

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/814549.shtml#.UpysNo3t62o

http://allafrica.com/stories/201312020555.html

[photo courtesy of “The China Africa Project”]

LIDS Event Review: Cornell’s Ndulo contextualizes Chinese investment across Africa

October 7, 2013 – Cristoforo Magliozzi

Is China propagating a new wave of exploitation in Africa or is it beneficially recasting the position of Africa in the global economy? Cornell Law Professor Muna Ndulo suggested a bit of both in his visit to Harvard Law School on Thursday, Oct. 3, while contextualizing broader international investment practices in Africa and China’s investment elsewhere in the world.

Ndulo cited the role of China supporting anti-apartheid guerrilla movements in 1994 South Africa to illustrate that self-interest always reigns in how governments relate to one another.  Whether a beneficial or detrimental outcome results depends on whether interests converge.

The scope of Chinese influence must also be well-considered—a minority of African nations today that do not have some form of democracy, and each iteration is nuanced. One cannot presume that Chinese investment props dictators or impedes the progression of human rights; the consequences of Chinese investment must be considered on a nation-by-nation basis.

In some instances, the Chinese non-interference policy on investment might actually boost rights tied predominantly to economic and not structural factors in ways that the conditional policies of other nations may fail to produce. And one must also remember the tremendous role that other foreign investment in Africa plays, such as from Europe and the United States. China is not a lone player on the continent, and moreover, it might be a proportionally bigger player on other continents when one inspects how invested China is in Brazil, for example.

By whatever causal factors, there is no denying that there is a shift in the African narrative from being the “hopeless continent” a decade ago to the “rising continent” today—predicted by the IMF to claim 7 slots of the world’s top 10 fastest growing economies over the next five years.

Insofar as rising commodity prices—some due to China imports on goods like copper—African nations must plan to safeguard themselves against the economic shocks a disruption of demand would bring. Given that, Ndulo pointed to Chinese motives as more than extraction of raw materials. China is also invested in African banks, manufacturing, and infrastructure. This is not to say these are for altruistic reasons—China is motivated to create new markets for its exports and to take advantage of international markets through Africa—such as obtaining indirect benefits from Africa’s free trade provisions with the U.S. through the African Growth and Opportunity Act.

Looking forward, African nations must raise capital with borrowing and investment being the two predominant options. Looking at borrowing-induced financial crises of the past, investment from China and elsewhere seems the way forward provided that gains are consolidated within Africa and harnessed for lasting change.

LIDS Event – Human Rights and Chinese Investment in Africa

Event: Human Rights and Chinese Investment in Africa with Professor Muna Ndulo

Professor Muna Ndulo will discuss the human rights consequences of Chinese investment within Africa. Professor Ndulo is an internationally recognized scholar in the fields of constitution making, governance and institution building, human rights and Foreign Direct Investments. He is a Professor of Law Cornell Law School and Director of the Cornell University’s Institute for African Development. He has previously served in a number of UN positions in various developing countries, including South Africa, East Timor, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. He has also worked for the World Bank, African Development Bank and United Nations Development Program.

LIDS Event – Human Rights and Chinese Investment in Africa

Event: Human Rights and Chinese Investment in Africa with Professor Muna Ndulo

When: Thursday, October 3 at noon

Location: WCC B015

Professor Muna Ndulo will discuss the human rights consequences of Chinese investment within Africa. Professor Ndulo is an internationally recognized scholar in the fields of constitution making, governance and institution building, human rights and Foreign Direct Investments. He is a Professor of Law Cornell Law School and Director of the Cornell University’s Institute for African Development. He has previously served in a number of UN positions in various developing countries, including South Africa, East Timor, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. He has also worked for the World Bank, African Development Bank and United Nations Development Program.