China trails US in Africa trade


A study has revealed that China has committed more than $75 billion to Africa in the past decade, at a very close second to the United States.

Johannesburg - A study has revealed that China has committed more than $75 billion to Africa in the past decade, at a very close second to the United States.

The database which was released on Monday by the Center for Global Development aims to be the most comprehensive account yet of foreign assistance by China, which has faced criticism in Western countries suspicious of Beijing&39;s motives.

The report found that China committed $75.4 billion to Africa from 2000 to 2011, just under the $90 billion by the United States and representing about one-fifth of the total from all major donor nations.

However, the researchers verified that only around $1.1 billion a year from China was official development assistance as defined by the club of major donors, which states that any loans come with concessionary terms.

"Pound for pound, when you compare the US versus China, the total official finance is roughly comparable. However, different people mean different things when they talk about Chinese aid," said Bradley Parks of the College of William and Mary, who is executive director of the AidData initiative behind the study.

"The composition of the official finance is very different," he said.

Amid the rapid growth of China&39;s economy, the emerging Asian power has increasingly been seen as a major player in international development but it has resisted calls by Western nations to be more transparent on its spending.

Faced with opaque data from Beijing, the new database instead draws on thousands of media reports about Chinese projects, tracking them to verify that they are going forward, with a hope that users will contribute information.

Parks, the co-author of the study, said that the researchers&39; main goal was to improve public information about Chinese assistance, not to answer questions on Beijing&39;s intentions.

"Frankly, there are a lot of people out there who have taken very strong opinions on one side or the other," he said.

"From our perspective, the value of what we&39;ve accomplished is to try to create a public good of use to researchers, journalists and civil society organisations and they can draw their own conclusions," he said.