IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ctwqxx/v43y2022i4p823-845.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Legitimating the Belt and Road Initiative: evidence from Chinese official rhetoric

Author

Listed:
  • Hai Yang

Abstract

This article examines how China sought to externally legitimate the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by means of official rhetoric. The BRI is a notable Chinese policy initiative with a focus on infrastructure provision. It has been gaining traction worldwide but is simultaneously dogged by controversies and contested by a widening array of actors. Departing from the predominant focus on the geopolitics and geoeconomics of the BRI and China, this research focuses on an important yet under-explored aspect: sustained and highly coordinated rhetorical efforts on the part of China with a view to asserting legitimacy for the BRI. Leveraging an analytical framework with fine-grained distinctions between legitimacy types and sources, the study conducted a fully integrated content analysis of 644 Chinese official texts on the BRI. It first identified inductively the set of recurrent legitimacy claims articulated by Chinese officials. A subsequent quantitative analysis showcased how different legitimacy claims featured in the official rhetoric and evolved over time. The findings have practical relevance for China’s external communications on the BRI and foreign actors’ (counter-)narratives and policy responses to the Chinese initiative.

Suggested Citation

  • Hai Yang, 2022. "Legitimating the Belt and Road Initiative: evidence from Chinese official rhetoric," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 823-845, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:43:y:2022:i:4:p:823-845
    DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2022.2029696
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01436597.2022.2029696
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01436597.2022.2029696?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ctwqxx:v:43:y:2022:i:4:p:823-845. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ctwq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.