In his comprehensive study, Yida Jiao examines the evolving model of China’s Agricultural Technology Demonstration Centres (ATDCs) in Africa, established to facilitate the transfer of Chinese agricultural know-how to developing countries. Since their inception in 2006 under the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), ATDCs have been promoted to blend technological assistance with commercial viability. Jiao critically analyses this dual-purpose structure, arguing that while ATDCs are an improvement on past aid efforts, moving away from purely grant-based models, they still embody inherent tensions between development objectives and profit motives. He underscores that although the centres are presented as instruments to boost food security and agricultural productivity, their operation is often shaped by the commercial interests of Chinese firms.
Jiao provides a detailed breakdown of the ATDC’s three-stage operational model: infrastructure development, technical cooperation, and business transition. He explains that while the Chinese state funds the initial stages, the ultimate goal is for Chinese enterprises to embed themselves commercially in local agricultural markets. However, Jiao notes that these centres often struggle to effectively adapt Chinese agricultural technologies to local contexts. There are frequent mismatches between Chinese expertise and local needs, such as the push to introduce high-yield Chinese seed varieties over locally preferred crops, and the lack of adequate infrastructure (like irrigation and electricity) further hinders the success of technology transfer.
Importantly, Jiao situates the ATDCs within the broader ideological framework of China’s own development path. He explains how Chinese development philosophy characterised by experimentalism and technocratic pragmatism shapes both the design and execution of these centres. Drawing on domestic models of agricultural extension, the ATDCs mirror Chinese governance practices, including the blending of public and private functions under a single institutional umbrella. This fusion, while potentially efficient, also generates confusion on the ground, particularly among African partners who may struggle to distinguish between aid activities and commercial ventures. Jiao notes that these blurred roles can lead to mistrust and diverging expectations between stakeholders.
The ATDCs are also sites of geopolitical signalling, as Jiao points out. While they serve to promote Chinese soft power by showcasing agricultural modernisation and capacity-building, their practical impact on African farming systems remains contested. Some evaluations highlight tangible benefits in yield improvements and skill development, while others question the sustainability of these outcomes once Chinese teams depart. Furthermore, Jiao highlights internal tensions within Chinese teams themselves, where young professionals seeking to contribute to development find their efforts sidelined by commercial imperatives.
Ultimately, Jiao’s analysis presents the ATDC model as an ambitious but conflicted experiment in South-South cooperation. He acknowledges its potential to support agricultural transformation in Africa, particularly by aligning with local development needs and leveraging Chinese expertise. However, he also warns that without greater sensitivity to local conditions, clearer boundaries between aid and commerce, and a sustained commitment beyond short-term training, ATDCs risk becoming more symbolic than transformational. His research offers a timely and critical contribution to understanding China’s role as a rising actor in global agricultural development.
* The Institute for Advanced International Studies (IAIS) does not take institutional positions on any issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IAIS.
