International Development Financing in the Second Cold War: The Miserly Convergence of Western Donors and China

ABSTRACT China's rise as a major development financing provider is widely seen as challenging traditional donor states’ influence over the norms and institutions of global development and over aid recipients. Amid intensifying geopolitical rivalry, now often called a new or second Cold War, some argue that traditional donors are adopting Chinese‐style practices to compete with China for developing countries’ allegiance. This article supports the convergence thesis but argues further that Chinese practices are also converging with those of traditional donors. Moreover, this convergence is on a less generous middle ground that will likely be worse for developing countries than the logic of geopolitical competition suggests. Rather than mobilizing additional resources, both sides are retrenching. This is because geopolitical competition is mediated through domestic political economy models entailing limits to providers’ generosity: China's commercial model confronts recipients’ declining repayment capacity, while traditional donors, unwilling to devote fiscal resources for aid, rely on mobilizing reluctant private finance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Development and Change
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12871
Citations
4
Primary Topic
International Development and Aid
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.80
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

International Development Financing in the Second Cold War: The Miserly Convergence of Western Donors and China

Lee Jones
4 citations
Development and Change
International Development and Aid
13.80
article

International Development Financing in the Second Cold War: The Miserly Convergence of Western Donors and China

Lee Jones
article en
4 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT China's rise as a major development financing provider is widely seen as challenging traditional donor states’ influence over the norms and institutions of global development and over aid recipients. Amid intensifying geopolitical rivalry, now often called a new or second Cold War, some argue that traditional donors are adopting Chinese‐style practices to compete with China for developing countries’ allegiance. This article supports the convergence thesis but argues further that Chinese practices are also converging with those of traditional donors. Moreover, this convergence is on a less generous middle ground that will likely be worse for developing countries than the logic of geopolitical competition suggests. Rather than mobilizing additional resources, both sides are retrenching. This is because geopolitical competition is mediated through domestic political economy models entailing limits to providers’ generosity: China's commercial model confronts recipients’ declining repayment capacity, while traditional donors, unwilling to devote fiscal resources for aid, rely on mobilizing reluctant private finance.

Development and ChangeVol. 56(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
International Development and Aid
13.80
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.