Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China Learn from Each Other?

The document compares the aid approaches of China and the EU in Africa, contrasting China's focus on economic infrastructure and non-interference with the EU's emphasis on social infrastructure, good governance, and conditionality. It argues that while these models are often perceived as competing, they can be complementary if both parties shift toward a pragmatic, recipient-centered perspective. The author suggests starting co-operation through second-track research and official exchange programmes to bridge the perception gap.

• China and the EU apply fundamentally different principles to aid: China emphasizes 'co-operation' over 'aid', adhering to a 'win-win formula' and a policy of no political conditions, whereas the EU views aid as a 'one-way instrument' to promote sustainable development and good governance through conditionality.
• The EU's aid conditionality has evolved from economic focus in the 1980s to a combination of economic and political requirements, including the use of 'country strategy papers' and 'governance incentive tranches' to promote democracy and human rights.
• China's 'no conditions attached' policy is based on the belief that all countries are equal and that political or economic reform must be internally driven rather than externally imposed.
• There is a stark difference in aid priorities: the EU focuses on social infrastructure, particularly government and civil society, while China prioritizes economic infrastructure, specifically power and transport sectors.
• The EU has transitioned its aid modalities from project-based support (1960-80) to policy-based programme support, and since 2000, toward budget support to foster recipient ownership.
• China utilizes a diversified set of instruments including grants, interest-free loans, and concessional loans, the latter of which are granted exclusively via the Exim Bank and often linked to the 'win-win' principle of mutual economic benefit.
• A significant perception gap exists: the EU often views China's non-interference as supporting autocratic governments and endangering debt sustainability, while China views EU conditionality as interference in internal affairs and a tool for exporting a specific development model.
• The author argues that the two models are not necessarily contradictory and could be complementary if evaluated based on recipient needs rather than donor national interests.
• To overcome diplomatic tensions and misperceptions, the author recommends starting co-operation through 'second-track approaches', such as joint research programmes and official exchange programmes.

APA

Ling, J. (2010). Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China Learn from Each Other? South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Occasional-Paper-56.pdf

Chicago

Ling, Jin. Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China Learn from Each Other? South African Institute of International Affairs, 2010. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Occasional-Paper-56.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Ling |first1=Jin |title=Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China Learn from Each Other? |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=March 2010 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Occasional-Paper-56.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{ling2010aid, author = {Ling, Jin}, title = {{Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China Learn from Each Other?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2010}, month = mar, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Occasional-Paper-56.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }