“Five Connectivity” is the term given to the basic cooperative framework of the Belt and Road Initiative, namely, policy coordination, facilities connectivity, unimpeded trade, financial integration and people-to-people bonds.

Since the initiative was first proposed about six years ago, transnational cooperation has been vibrant in various sectors. We have conducted quantitative and qualitative analysis on the progress of the Belt and Road Initiative in as many as 94 countries across the world, trying to categorize these countries as per the Five-Connectivity situation.

Basically, the 94 countries fall into eight categories. First is countries of overall smooth cooperation which have high scores in all five indicators. The research has found 19 such countries, including Germany, Russia, Malaysia, Turkey and Qatar, accounting for more than 20 percent of the total number, indicating a remarkable achievement of the BRI.

Second is countries with great potential. There are 14 countries fall in this category, including Australia, Pakistan, India, Sweden and Italy. They perform excellent in two or three indicators, showing they have a sound foundation and can be expected to make further progress.

Third is countries outstanding in a single connectivity area. It finds nine countries in this situation. For example, France has a very high score in people-to-people bonds (17.83), but low scores (lower than 13) in other areas.

Six countries including Albania, Georgia and Lithuania are categorized as countries with equal potential in five connectivity areas, because they show no apparent advantage or weakness in the indicators.

Countries falling in the fifth to seventh categories show apparent weak points in at least one aspect -- financial integration, facilities connectivity, policy coordination. For example, financial integration was lacked in 27 countries, whose score in the indicator are lower than 8.

The last category is countries yet to be strengthened in cooperation in all regards. There are 12 countries, such as Algeria, Moldova, Samoa and Tonga, have overall low connectivity with China.

Key findings

Some BRI studies found that the level of interconnectedness between China and other counties is related to geographic distance. But when more European countries are taken into account, that conclusion changes.

Southeast Asia has the highest total Five-Connectivity score, followed by Central Asia and Mongolia, Eurasia and Europe. But then comes, with a higher score than South Asia, West Asia and North Africa, which are geographically nearer to China. Germany and Britain made it to the top 10 in the country list.

Clearly, geographic distance does not play a decisive role in connectivity.

Although all five areas are being pushed forward, there is differentiation in the development of the areas, and the differentiation among various countries in Five Connectivity development are significant.

On the whole, the areas of unimpeded trade and people-to-people bonds have higher scores than the other three aspects, and the area of financial integration shows the largest degree of dispersion among countries.

Regionally, Southeast Asia has the highest scores in unimpeded trade, financial integration and people-to-people bonds, and a low score only in facilities connectivity. Central Asia and Mongolia have the top score in policy coordination and a relatively high score in unimpeded trade. Europe has apparent advantages in trade and people-to-people bonds. Eurasia’s scores of each of the five indicators are most evenly distributed. And West Asia and North Africa has a good score in trade despite a low score on the whole.

Compared with ASEAN countries and Central and Eastern European countries under the “16+1” mechanism, countries in West Asia and North Africa need a vibrant regional organization for effective policy alignment. Also, some governments have yet to recognize the importance of supporting the initiative in developing relations with China, so the degree of attention and support in those nations needs to be further enhanced.

In term of facilities connectivity, China should pay additional attention to such factors as the relative lag in creating large transportation and energy facilities, long engineering cycles and difficult engineering, and it also should take into consideration political and security risks of projects in different nations.

In the area of financial cooperation, the level of differentiation within a region is higher than between regions, which means China should rely on backbone countries of a region to expand the level of financial integration in the whole region. Expanding China’s currency swap agreements with other countries and expanding the investment projects of the development banks are two possible measures with low risk and good expected outcomes.

People-to-people bonds are the most basic, solid and lasting factor, and is a long-term and continuous process. To further improve the people-to-people bond, China must attach importance to benefiting people’s livelihood, building mutual understanding among peoples, and deepening friendship among the peoples of various nations.

Unimpeded trade is a significant component of the BRI, and there is already a high average level of trade among the nations taking part in the initiative. The improvement in financial integration and people-to-people bonds can enhance trade greatly. Within unimpeded trade, the role of production capacity cooperation as a catalyst deserves attention, and the integration of local labor markets needs to be taken into account in the future.

Zhai Kun is senior researcher of Taihe Institute and professor at the School of International Studies of Peking University. (Chen Yiyuan contributed to the article.)

The author contributed this article to China Watch exclusively. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of China Watch.

All rights reserved. Copying or sharing of any content for other than personal use is prohibited without prior written permission.