Author(s)

Yiding Li

Business School, China University of Political Science and Law, Beijing, China.

International Capacity Cooperation China proposes a new model of international economic cooperation, which is of great significance for promoting China’s surplus capacity transfer and industrial transformation and upgrading. It is an inevitable choice for China to respond to changes in the global industrial chain. This paper uses the “geese line model” theory to explore the opportunities and challenges of China-Africa international capacity development. The study finds that the scale of China-Africa capacity cooperation is expanding, and China’s foreign implementation of the “flying geese model” drives the economic development of underdeveloped countries in Africa. The status quo of non-capacity cooperation: at present, the cooperation mode between other countries and Africa poses a challenge to China-Africa international capacity cooperation. China-Africa industrialization cooperation and other cooperation have not been coordinated, and Africa is hard to bear the large-scale capacity transfer in China in the short term. This is the challenge of capacity cooperation between China and Africa. Therefore, China-Africa capacity cooperation must consolidate the foundation of sustainable development of China-Africa relations, and at the same time strengthen infrastructure construction to help economic and trade development, and jointly improve the development of the service industry, build Chinese business cards, and enhance corporate brands. Looking into the future, China-Africa capacity cooperation model has two directions: first, to build industrial parks, to undertake labor-intensive industry transfer; second, African countries to upgrade infrastructure through China-Africa Industrial Park.

“One Belt, One Road” Initiative, China-Africa Capacity Cooperation, Capacity Transfer, New Thinking

Li, Y. (2019) New Thinking on Capacity Cooperation between China and Africa under the “Belt and Road Initiative”. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 95-106. doi: 10.4236/jss.2019.712008.