Description
South–South cooperation has remained a persistent feature of international development debates, and its relevance is evident in constant public refrains even as its visibility has receded in the current moment, particularly in the context of disruptive technologies. While North–South debates over inequality, welfare, and power asymmetries continue to find headlines, the idea of South–South cooperation has evolved slowly and become significantly less visible over time. This paper traces the changing politics of technology transfer, science and technology cooperation, information and communication technologies, and innovation from the Buenos Aires Plan of Action (1978) to the Doha South Summit (2005).
Drawing on official conference documents, background papers, and development reports, the paper argues that South–South cooperation increasingly shifted from an emphasis on collective self-reliance and “brain drain” toward a broader concern with connectivity, trade, investment, information networks, and governance involving non-state actors. Rather than viewing development solely through the lenses of market integration or structural dependency, these debates offer a more realistic conception of what the paper calls “shadow governance” — where cooperation occurs through a combination of creative agency and weakness in the global structures of IPE. The framework helps explain how politics works under conditions of declining public visibility, and how intermediaries help countries navigate structural inequalities while opening possibilities for regional and transnational linkages.
Methodologically, the paper combines documentary analysis with historical evidence on technology transfer and its utilisation across developing regions. In doing so, it identifies the growing importance of regional intermediaries — including merchants, brokers, financiers, technology distributors, logistics providers, and entrepreneurial cities — in facilitating the movement of technology, expertise, and capital. The paper argues that these actors occupied an increasingly important place in both the practice and the imagination of South–South cooperation, pointing toward forms of economic intermediation that remain insufficiently theorised within mainstream international political economy.