Search

This paper examines China's policy and position in relation to the evolving climate change negotiations in order to explain how China is dealing with the dilemma of meeting its growing development needs while reducing GHG emissions. It argues that global climate governance requires steering and leadership to deal with the interlocked political process; that the developing countries (DCS) right to develop is challenged by the need for ecosystemic standards especially as climate change is seen as a zero-sum game as the more one country emits the less another one can. This is especially problematic as Industrialized countries (ICS) appear to be both unwilling and unable to increase growth without increasing emissions. This explains China's policy of insisting on its right to develop, of demanding that ics reduce their emissions and that they fulfil their obligations under the FCCC, while expressing its willingness to take on a voluntary target. The paper argues that China's state-led transition has eight unique characteristics that may allow it to lead as it moves beyond a no-regrets policy to a circular and green economy, cooperating with other DCS and mobilizing conscious green values in citizens. The question remains--will the initial success and scale of state-led transition lead the global green transition to a sustainable world? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Influenced by promising economic indicators, the mass media and policy circles have begun to use the term "China Model" to celebrate China's fast-speed development. However, researchers are still not clear what exactly the China Model is. This paper provides a critical examination of the China Model of development. This paper starts with a discussion of what are the major characteristics of the China Model and why the developing countries are attracted to them. Then this paper argues that researchers should not take the China Model for granted because its ingredients are highly contested. Finally, this paper discusses what implication the China Model has for developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article concerns Chinese energy relations with Kazakhstan and Russia, surveying the foreign direct investment (FDI) behavior of Chinese National Oil Companies (NOCS) in Kazakhstan and Russia. The first section provides a schematic overview of the general development of Chinese FDI strategy and behavior from the disintegration of the Soviet Union up until the present day. It systematically explains how that development occurred in three phases and gives some key indicators for distinguishing among the phases and the transition between successive phases. The second section looks more closely at the FDI strategy and behavior of the Chinese NOCS specifically regarding Kazakhstan and Russia, periodizing it according to the first two of the three chronological phases distinguished in the first section. The third section of the article examines still more closely the phenomenon regarding Kazakhstan and Russia from the end of the last decade up until the present day, dividing the third above-mentioned phase into three subphases and inspecting the first two, of which the second is still ongoing. The fourth section of the article evaluates the conduct of Chinese NOCS with regard to Kazakhstan and Russia from the standpoint of motives of corporate behavior and comparative incentive structures. The fifth section of the article concludes by introducing some caveats on the basis of a glance at recent behavior with respect to another large resource-rich country, Canada, where Chinese NOCS have made massive FDI for some years now, but which has a rather different economic and social structure from Kazakhstan and Russia. The last section of the conclusion also includes a few final comments on the prospects for Chinese energy and Chinese NOCS during the remainder of the decade and into the 2020s, on the basis of the analytical framework employed to structure the narrative analysis in the body of the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article uses the case of Ghana to provide insight into the policies and strategies used by, as well as the cooperation between, Chinese state actors in their quest for natural resources in Africa. In 2007, Ghana discovered commercial quantities of oil. While the so-called Jubilee oilfield was initially divided amongst primarily Western oil companies, in 2010 the China National Offshore Oil Corporation partnered with Ghana's national oil company to try and purchase a stake in Jubilee. Although this bid was rejected, later that year a second Chinese state-owned oil company, Sinopec, was able to access Ghana's oil indirectly through an offtaker agreement, linked to a $3 billion dollar loan provided by the state-owned China Development Bank. The article uses these two cases to examine the level of coordination between the strategies of Chinese state actors in their attempts to access African natural resources, it shows that China's national oil companies and policy banks operate in increasingly autonomous ways. This goes against the developmental state thesis, which argues that the Chinese state has full control over the overseas activities of its state actors. The article also shows that national political institutions in Africa can make use of and are able to influence Chinese resource deals, countering the notion of African passivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research deepens the existing literature on the local nature of the globalization of business. The authors argue for a comparative perspective in the study of small business in China and the U.S. At the same time, we investigate the roles of institutions and human capital in local economic development The analysis of these phenomena are conducted based on a geographic perspective, since the desire for wealth and entrepreneurial motives may be universal, but national and regional realities and cultural differences can influence the choice and success of methods to initiate and promote small businesses [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intellectual property rights (IPR) have increasingly been an issue as increased globalization has caused trading states to reconsider their efforts to protect inventions and then license those inventions to other states through their respective multinational corporations. Since China and India have been on the forefront of recent economic advances, states like the US, and international organizations, like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), have had to analyze their existing regulations on IPR. Here, the author looks a how the US and WIPO developed its present IPR regime and what the likely responses will be from China and India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]