Kuşak ve Yol’dan Make in India’ya: Küresel Ekonomik Katılımın Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analizi

Abstract

Çin ve Hindistan, ekonomik kalkınma, yönetişim modelleri ve küresel ekonomik dönüşüm üzerine yürütülen güncel tartışmaları şekillendiren en etkili aktörlerden ikisi olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Benzer yapısal baskılarla karşı karşıya olmalarına karşın belirgin biçimde farklı kalkınma yolları izleyen önde gelen gelişmekte olan ekonomiler olarak bu iki ülkenin deneyimleri; alternatif büyüme stratejileri, bölgesel kalkınma ve küresel ekonomik entegrasyona ilişkin önemli içgörüler sunmaktadır. Bu bağlamda çalışma, özellikle yönetişim yapıları, bölgesel kalkınma politikaları ve küresel ekonomik katılım biçimlerine odaklanarak Çin ve Hindistan’ın kalkınma stratejileri arasındaki farklılıkları incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Nitel karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma tasarımına dayanan analiz, resmî politika belgeleri, kalkınma planları ve ikincil akademik kaynakların doküman analizi ile birlikte nitel içerik analizi yöntemlerine dayanmaktadır. Karşılaştırmalı değerlendirme; yönetişim ve planlama mekanizmaları, mekânsal eşitsizliklerin yönetilmesine yönelik bölgesel kalkınma stratejileri ve küresel ekonomik entegrasyon yaklaşımları olmak üzere üç temel ölçüt etrafında yapılandırılmıştır. Bu çerçevede özellikle Çin’in Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi (Belt and Road Initiative-BRI) ile Hindistan’ın Make in India programı karşılaştırmalı olarak ele alınmaktadır. Her iki vakaya tutarlı bir analitik boyutlar setinin uygulanması ise sistematik ve kavramsal açıdan dengeli bir karşılaştırma yapılmasına imkân tanımaktadır. Bulgular, Çin’in kalkınma stratejisinin; uzun vadeli planlama, büyük ölçekli altyapı yatırımları ve altyapı temelli küresel angajmanı önceleyen merkezî ve devlet öncülüğünde bir yönetişim modeli tarafından şekillendirildiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Buna karşılık Hindistan’ın kalkınma yaklaşımı, düzenleyici reformları, doğrudan yabancı yatırımları ve küresel değer zincirlerine ortaklık temelli entegrasyonu önceleyen daha adem-i merkeziyetçi ve piyasa odaklı bir modeli yansıtmaktadır. Normatif değerlendirmelerden kaçınan çalışma, farklı yönetişim mantıklarının benzer küresel koşullar altında nasıl farklı güçlü yönler ve kısıtlar ürettiğini vurgulamaktadır. Makale, betimleyici politika anlatılarının ötesine geçen ve Çin ile Hindistan’a ilişkin kavramsal olarak tutarlı bir karşılaştırmalı analiz sunarak karşılaştırmalı kalkınma literatürüne katkıda bulunmaktadır. Yönetişim yapıları ile bölgesel kalkınma stratejileri ve küresel ekonomik katılım arasındaki ilişkileri birlikte ele alan çalışma, Küresel Güney’deki gelişmekte olan ekonomiler için alternatif kalkınma yollarına dair özgün içgörüler ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

• Çin
• Hindistan
• Kalkınma Stratejileri
• Make in India
• Kuşak ve Yol Girişimi

From the Belt and Road to Make in India: A Comparative Assessment of Global Economic Engagement

Abstract

China and India have emerged as two of the most influential actors shaping contemporary debates on economic development, governance models, and global economic transformation. As leading emerging economies facing similar structural pressures yet pursuing markedly different development paths, their experiences provide valuable insights into alternative strategies of growth, regional development, and global economic integration. Within this context, this study aims to explore how China and India differ in their development strategies with particular attention to governance structures, regional development policies, and modes of global economic engagement. Drawing on a qualitative comparative research design, the analysis is based on document analysis and qualitative content analysis of official policy documents, development plans, and secondary academic sources. The comparative assessment is structured around three core criteria: governance and planning mechanisms, regional development strategies aimed at managing spatial inequalities, and approaches to global economic integration, with particular emphasis on Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Make in India program. Applying a consistent set of analytical dimensions to both cases allows for a systematic and conceptually balanced comparison. The findings suggest that China’s development strategy is shaped by a centralized, state-led governance model emphasizing long-term planning, large-scale infrastructure investment, and infrastructure-driven global engagement. In contrast, India’s development approach reflects a more decentralized and market-oriented model prioritizing regulatory reform, foreign direct investment, and partnership-based integration into global value chains. Rather than advancing normative evaluations, the study highlights how distinct governance logics produce different strengths and constraints under comparable global conditions. The article contributes to the literature on comparative development by offering a conceptually consistent analysis of China and India that moves beyond descriptive policy narratives. By linking governance structures to regional development strategies and global economic engagement, the study provides original insights into alternative development pathways among emerging economies in the Global South.

Keywords

• China
• India
• Development Strategies
• Make in India
• Belt and Road Initiative

References

1. Anand Gupta. (2018, July 20). The Future of Mobility in India’s Passenger-vehicle Market – The Leading Solar Magazine In India. https://www.eqmagpro.com/tag/the-future-of-mobility-in-indias-passenger-vehicle-market/
2. Ang, Y. Y. (2019, May 22). Demystifying Belt and Road. Foreign Affairs. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2019-05-22/demystifying-belt-and-road?gad=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw6cKiBhD5ARIsAKXUdyZJ4399Nhx_zyUvPaMHmq2V4uakcNKh9cCeby5-dnk6_F6xy-4Pmh8aAh3FEALw_wcB
3. Aras, F. Ç., & Kandemir, E. (2023a). An Evaluation of India’s Central Asian Policy in the Context of Regional Interests. Bilig, 105, 159–181. https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.10507
4. Aras, F. C., & Kandemir, E. (2023b). Returning to Quad: India’s Search for Regional Security. Codrul Cosminului, 29(2), 401–424. https://doi.org/10.4316/CC.2023.02.08
5. Bell, M., Kochhar, K., & Khor, H. (1993). China at the Threshold of a Market Economy. International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781557753496.084
6. Bhalla, A. S. (1995). Recent Economic Reforms in China and India. Asian Survey, 35(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.2307/2645709
7. Bhardwaj, R. D. (1992). China’s Economic Reform: The Role And Significance Of SEZs. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 53(3), 332–373. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41855617
8. Bilgic Alpaslan, I. (2013). Bir Bolgesel Kalkinma Hikayesi: Bati Cin (A Regional Development Story: Western China). Tepav.

9. Brødsgaard, K. E. (2016). China’s 13th Five-Year Plan: A Draft Proposal. The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies, 33(2), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.22439/cjas.v33i2.4968
10. Cao, C. (2004). Challenges for Technological Development in China’s Industry: Foreign investors are the main providers of technology. China Perspectives, 2004(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.4000/chinaperspectives.924
11. Chatzk, A., & McBride, J. (2020). China’s Massive Belt and Road Initiative. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 8 January 2021, from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative
12. Clarke, M. (2017). The Belt and Road Initiative: China’s New Grand Strategy? Asia Policy, 24, 71–79. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26403204
13. Crane, B., Albrecht, C., Duffin, K. M., & Albrecht, C. (2018). China’s special economic zones: An analysis of policy to reduce regional disparities. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 5(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2018.1430612
14. Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade. (2016). Make in India: Annual Report 2016–2017. Government of India. Retrieved from https://dpiit.gov.in/sites/default/files/English-Annual-Report-2016-17_0.pdf
15. Dogra, S. (2011). India and China’s 12th Five Year Plans: A Comparison of Changing Priorities. ISAS Insights, 14, 1–11.
16. Ebel, F. (2022, December 30). Putin and Xi highlight Russia-China cooperation against backdrop of war. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/30/putin-xi-call-cooperation-ukraine/
17. Gauba, R., Nandita, & Dhingra. (2018). Make in India- An Initiative to Change the Economic Landscape of the Country. Amity Journal of Economics, 1(2), 88–104.
18. Griffiths, J. (2017). Just what is this One Belt, One Road thing anyway? CNN. Retrieved January 8, 2021, from https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/11/asia/china-one-belt-one-road-explainer/index.html
19. Heilmann, S., & Melton, O. (2013). The Reinvention of Development Planning in China, 1993–2012. Modern China, 39(6), 580–628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0097700413497551
20. Hu, A. (2013). The Distinctive Transition of China’s Five-Year Plans. Modern China, 39(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1177/0097700413499129
21. Huang, Y. (2010). Reinterpreting China’s Success Through the New Economic Geography. carnegie Press. https://carnegieendowment.org/files/reinterpreting_china_success1.pdf
22. Kaiman, J. (2012, December 26). China opens world’s longest high-speed railway line. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/26/china-high-speed-rail-bullet-trains
23. Kamaljeet, K., Geeta, M., & Rauth, B. (2016). Designing Smart Cities Using Sustainable Development Model. In V. Nath, R. K. Sharma, A. S. Rao, B. R. Bhardway, M. K. Chaubey, & T. Tiwari (Eds), Make in India Through Sustainable Development: Achieving Inclusive Growth (pp. 327–333). Bharti Publications.
24. Kiziltan, A. (2004). Tek Kutuplu Bir Dunyada Cin Halk Cumhuriyeti’nin Super Guc Olabilirligi (The People’s Republic of China Can Become a Superpower in a Unipolar World). Cumhuriyet University Ibf Journal, 5(1), 40–61.
25. Liu, K.-C., & Racherla, U. S. (Eds). (2019). Innovation, Economic Development, and Intellectual Property in India and China: Comparing Six Economic Sectors. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8102-7
26. Morrison, W. M. (2019). China’s Economic Rise: History, Trends, Challenges, and Implications for the United States (No. RL33534). Congressional Research Service. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20190625_RL33534_088c5467dd11365dd4ab5f72133db289fa10030f.pdf
27. National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2021). Statistical Communiqué of the People’s Republic of China on the 2020 National Economic and Social Development. Retrieved from https://www.stats.gov.cn/english/PressRelease/202102/t20210228_1814152.html
28. National Development and Reform Commission of the People’s Republic of China. (2011). Outline of the Twelfth Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the People’s Republic of China (2011–2015). https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/chn205796.pdf
29. Ogden, S. (2023). The Impact of China’s Dams on the Mekong River Basin: Governance, Sustainable Development, and the Energy-Water Nexus. Journal of Contemporary China, 32(139), 152–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2022.2052445
30. Parameswaran, P. (2019). Advancing Democracy in the US Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy. Retrieved 8 January 2021, from https://thediplomat.com/2019/04/advancing-democracy-in-the-us-free-and-open-indo-pacific-strategy/
31. PDO. (2016, June 24). Chronology of China’s Belt and Road Initiative [People’s Daily Online]. http://en.people.cn/n3/2016/0624/c90883-9077342.html
32. Peyrouse, S. (2016). Discussing China: Sinophilia and sinophobia in Central Asia. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 7(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2015.10.003
33. Planning Commission, Government of India. (2013). Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012–2017): Faster, More Inclusive and Sustainable Growth (Vol. I). Retrieved from https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2023-08/12fyp_vol1.pdf
34. Sangui, W., & Zhou, L. (2011). The 8-7 National Poverty Reduction Program in China—The National Strategy and its Impact. https://web.worldbank.org/archive/website00819C/WEB/PDF/CHINA_-4.PDF
35. Tantri, M. L. (2016). Special economic zones in India: Policy, performance and prospects. Cambridge University Press.
36. Worldbank. (2004). China: Western Development Strategy-Infrastructure and Regional Development. World Bank Group. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/174371468778781705
37. Yeung, Y., Lee, J., & Kee, G. (2009). China’s Special Economic Zones at 30. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 50(2), 222–240. https://doi.org/10.2747/1539-7216.50.2.222