Assessing the Environmental Sustainability Potential of BRI Countries under the Five Connectivities Framework
Repository Usage Stats
China’s ambitious vision for the Belt and the Road initiative (BRI) marks a global milestone for economic and political cooperation across Asia, Europe, Africa, and South America. With more than 100 member countries accounting for around one-third of the world trade, BRI’s geographical scope is unmatched. Despite China’s vision for “green” development, BRI’s trillion-dollar infrastructure and energy projects introduce immense environmental risks. Carbon-intensive investments and recipient countries’ asymmetry in addressing environmental issues pose challenges in sustaining green development and meeting the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. Our research investigates China’s vision for green investments by gauging BRI countries’ potential to support environmentally sustainable projects. The study assesses the environmental sustainability potential (ESP) for each country’s performance on climate and energy across the “Five Connectivity Framework”, identified by the Chinese government as the BRI cooperation priority across policy, trade, finance, facilities, and people-to-people connections. The ESP index scores BRI countries across these five connectivities using key environmental indicators. The analysis also presents a case study of BRI countries along the three Asian economic corridors to identify trends and provide specific recommendations for environmental safeguards.
CitationGuo, Jiaxin; Nwe, Mya; Qazi, Zainab; & Zhou, Shuyi (2019). Assessing the Environmental Sustainability Potential of BRI Countries under the Five Connectivities Framework. Master's project, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/18450.
More InfoShow full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Nicholas School of the Environment
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info