Analysis by Zsolt Trembeczki
While debates over China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) dominate the discourse over global infrastructure development, countries sceptical of the purpose or potential of the BRI have launched multiple alternative initiatives. This analysis compares two case studies: the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) launched by Japan and India in 2017, in part building on Japan’s Quality Infrastructure concept, and the G7’s 2021 Build Back Better World (B3W) plan, which is effectively a follow-up on the Blue Dot Network announced by the United States, Japan, and Australia in 2019. The paper concludes that the set of high financial and project quality standards of these initiatives may lead to better overall return but also prohibitive initial costs, while admirable goals like gender equity or digitised governance may not always respond adequately to the infrastructure priorities of developing countries. Furthermore, while these initiatives rely heavily on mobilising private capital, the literature clearly shows that infrastructure projects, especially in developing regions, are typically rather unattractive for private investors. Nevertheless, with a staggering USD 15 trillion gap in projected needs and actual spending on global infrastructure by 2040, there is no reason for a zero-sum competition between Chinese and Western connectivity programmes. Thus, Hungary should remain open to all and not commit exclusively to any of these initiatives.
For the full text please click here!