China’s investments in African minerals can be “win-win”
Chinese demand for African minerals has grown hugely in recent years, and now represents a critical trading relationship both for the continent’s economic development and China’s growth plans. However, natural resources have a mixed history in driving development, too often succumbing to the ‘resource curse’ spiral of corruption, environmental degradation and in the worst cases conflict.
Last week in China Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala – World Bank Managing Director and ONE board member – made an important speech explaining how to consign this ‘resource curse’ to the history books. In her eyes Chinese investments can be made mutually beneficial by following 5 key principles: Align Investments with Countries’ Development Priorities; Practice Transparency; Add Value to the Country and its People; Pay What is Due and Do What is Right; and Engage with Local Communities.
The speech as a whole is well worth reading – and commands attention coming from one of the foremost advocates for transparency and accountability in Africa. While Finance Minister of Nigeria Dr Ngozi published each state’s monthly financial allocation from the federal government in the newspapers. This allowed Nigerian civil society to hold their leaders to account and cut down on wasted funds.
ONE is campaigning for these principles to be applied to the oil, gas and mining industries. In the US this has already paid dividends with the passing of legislation in July that ensures companies have to publish what they pay governments in countries where they operate – once again empowering civil society. We are now seeking to replicate that legislation in other countries, particularly in Europe.
The importance of getting this right should not be understated. In total exports of all natural resources in Africa were worth roughly $393.9 billion in 2008, nearly 9 times the value of international aid to the continent ($44 billion), and over 10 times the value of exports of agricultural produce ($37.9 billion).
Central to success in this area will be the China-Africa relationship, of which the last word should go to Dr Ngozi:
“If China and Africa could work together in a transparent and mutually beneficial way, I am convinced that when history is written, this collaboration will be a strong part of the economic recovery story post financial crises.”
- Previous Post Bob Geldof: ‘We need to shout’
- Next Post Mixed progress in the fight against the AIDS epidemic
 |
 |
 |
About the Blog
The International ONE Blog is a daily log of the anti-poverty movement. The site is operated by ONE staff, with guest contributions from ONE volunteers, members and allies.
The content of each post and each comment represents the views of that author and does not necessarily reflect the views of ONE. ONE does not support or oppose any candidate for elected office, and any post expressing support or opposition for a candidate is not endorsed by ONE.
24/11/2010 at 5:37 pm
Hi, I have a comment, related to China and Africa, the World …and the next COP16, I have no other way to contact ONE, I have no answer in the other ways so, probably your name is on the destiny
PLEASE READ IT AND SHARE, IT IS IMPORTANT.
In the last international meeting to solve the climate crisis (UNFCCC) in Copenhague, Goverments were not able to find a solution, and I think I could give some idea for discussion, maybe it is not perfect but is an option.
I would like you to consider this in order that it have some interesting points that could help to development of the countries in America and Africa. If this idea is consider it could give some extra help to upgrading and expanding energy infrastructure. Africa would get the more benefits just for the size of its countries.
All this I´m telling you is just a personal effort, I´m not in any organization or politics.
I was so disapointed because presidents and representatives are waiting for the USA and China solution, and some times that is not the best, not now that we need include all the countries in the world to get a better environment future.
President of Mexico Felipe Calderon has a copy of this idea and also some of the secretaries, people in the UN and EU, GreenPeace, and The Climate Group. It could be a good idea if someone can give it voice and support in the COP16.
Please help me to put this letter in the right hands, I mean, in the e-mail or documents of the people who can give support and voice.
Probably in yours actually.
Best Regards,
The Idea:
FONDO VERDE
BASICS: Each country has its own industry development and international commerce and in this proportion involves and generates contaminants agents (fabrics, transportation, planes, packaging, CO2, etc. Until now the process to get financing is a merchant process, my proposal is turn this and use the international importations in order to generate the financing.
The “Fondo Verde” mentioned by Felipe Calderon president of México, could easily be integrated with the 0.4% -negotiable- of each country importations. This percentage can be adjusted to reach the 140 thousand million dollars per year or the goal established to stop the Climatic Change.
This contribution could be a tax paid in frontier commerce offices to be sent to the Fondo Verde, or paid by governments each year.
Extending this to ALL countries become fair. For example China and USA, with the biggest industries (and more contaminants), necessarily have to give a bigger contribution, and African or smaller countries with smaller industries (and less contaminants) would contribute with a lower amount.
To this I would add contributions of developed nations needed for the historic contamination caused to get its actual industries.
FONDO VERDE:
0.4 % of World importations + developed countries contributions = FONDO VERDE
FONDO VERDE DISTRIBUTION
The goal is stop Climatic Change and help less developed countries to fight against it, reduce the damage caused, and get a sustainable future.
According to this my proposal is make distribution based on the geographic area, not economy factor. A big country is affected in a bigger way and need a bigger percentage of the Fondo Verde to invest in technology and green projects. A small country has a small area where apply this help.
The idea is to sum up the geographic area of each country and calculate the world total area.
Then is easy to get percentage correspondent to each country and use this to obtain the correspondent amounts of the Fondo Verde.
Establishing this percentage, we have the advantage of adaptation because amounts could be variable according to the world economy year by year,
It is important to extend this proposal and get involve to ALL countries in the world because they are all affected. Even African countries in poverty, they would make none contribution but could get their correspondent amount that would be a great help (considering their geographic extension) to support development in generating energy, artificial lakes, reforestation, generation of work opportunities, etc.
Geographic area of all countries = 100%
N= A country
(Geographic Percentage of N ) (Total Amount in Fondo Verde) = Amount assigned to N
SOLVING CONFLICTS
1. CONTRIBUTION OF DEVELOPED COUNTRIES.
My proposal is establish the donation of the correspondent amount of developed countries in order to add this to Fondo Verde for distribution. And do this in the first 15 years as an extra effort to contain the damage caused and stop Climatic Change.
2. CHINA
I think China must admit the recent development of its industry (and contamination), numbers are clear and don’t lie.
We know this country doesn’t have the historic contamination of others, but world can not wait for it and then act. It could be treated as a third world nation 5 years, compromising to reduce CO2 emissions to the minimal levels, letting supervisions and then, assume responsibility as a developed country to make correspondent donation next 10 years. All this is negotiable.
3. SOCIETY
Society needs to be educated in making conscience about environment subjects including people and industries. The contribution proposed could be considered as an “energetic cost”, added to the price of any product. If everybody contaminate, is our responsability to help to with the solution.
I think that if industries –export by first- could get the contribution or cost back in some way with the clean energetic and emissions containing projects, participation and interest will be generated immediately.
4. NO CONTRIBUTION – NO AMOUNT.
Countries who refuse to participate in the agreement for any reason would mean to refuse their amount percentage of the Fondo Verde. Probably this would move China and other big countries to participate.
25/11/2010 at 5:41 pm
its true anyway they deserve a win because of their goods and services offered meet any of the three social class
29/11/2010 at 12:43 pm
Thanks for your ideas Claudia.