AGDI currently has about 300 publications.
2017 |
|
| 1. | Asongu, Jacinta Nwachukwu Simplice C A Chapter Conclusion, pp. 263-283, Part of the series The Palgrave Macmillan Asian Business Series, First edition, 2017. Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Africa, China, conomic relations @inbook{Asongu_492, author = {Jacinta Nwachukwu C Simplice A. Asongu}, url = {http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-47030-6_11}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-47030-6_11}, year = {2017}, date = {2017-02-03}, pages = {263-283}, publisher = {Part of the series The Palgrave Macmillan Asian Business Series}, edition = {First edition}, chapter = {Conclusion}, abstract = {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. The chapter presents arguments for a development paradigm that reconciles the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model. The analytical framework is organised in three main strands: (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 pessimists, preferences in rights (human vs. national, idiosyncratic vs. sovereign and political vs. economic) and the Beijing model versus the Washington Consensus.}, keywords = {Africa, China, conomic relations}, pubstate = {published}, tppubtype = {inbook} } 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. The chapter presents arguments for a development paradigm that reconciles the Washington Consensus with the Beijing Model. The analytical framework is organised in three main strands: (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 pessimists, preferences in rights (human vs. national, idiosyncratic vs. sovereign and political vs. economic) and the Beijing model versus the Washington Consensus. |
