2.1. Sustainable Development Theory
Sustainable development refers to the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Specifically speaking, at the level of requirements, to meet the needs of the present means that sustainable development must first of all demonstrate the quality of development; while not compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs denotes the maintaining or enhancing of the development momentum. At the level of objectives, the harmony between human beings and nature also proposed the essentials for equity in addition to emphasizing the quality and driving force of development. Although equity also belongs to one aspect of development quality in a broad sense, in order to reflect its uniqueness and importance, people usually summarize the connotation of sustainable development as three elements: quality, driving force, and equity. Among them, the quality element mainly reflects the matching and optimization degree of development status, efficiency, happiness, etc., with ecological environment capacity and carrying capacity. The driving force element reflects the potentiality of sustainable development of countries or regions, which are mostly composed of some endowments indexes, such as natural capital, human capital, etc.; while equity element mainly expresses the elimination of the disparities between rich and poor, various regions, and urban and rural areas, as well as gender differences, intergenerational differences, and so forth.
Based on the above understanding, at present, the theoretical framework of sustainable development is mainly manifested in the following models: pressure-state-response model (PSR), reaction-action cycle (RAC), Daly triangle, information pyramid, etc. [
20,
21,
22]. Among them, the most widely used is the PSR model proposed by the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, based on which some variation models, such as Driving Force-State-Response Framework (DFSR), Pressure-State-Impact-Response Framework (PSIR), Driving Force-Pressure-Status-Impact-Response Framework (DPSIR), and so forth, are generated. The advantage of this model is that it theoretically contains a clearer logical relationship, viz., “what is the status quo, why, and how to deal with it?” Unfortunately, during the specific operation, the basis or logic of the causal relationship between many indexes is not very reliable, and even perplexed by the problem of two-way causality.
Considering that theoretical frameworks invariably require comprehensive consideration of the complicated system of economy, society, and environment, as well as the regional differences, we believe that it may be more reasonable and applicable to establish a theoretical model of sustainable development from a bedding of the system dimension. According to the existing literature and information, the modeling analyses of most studies are usually conducted from the perspectives of the economy, society, and environment. Some scholars or institutions (such as the UN Commission on Sustainable Development) consider the economy, society, environment, and system as evaluation dimensions for sustainable development. However, there are still some deficiencies in the construction and demonstration of the logical relations among different dimensions in these theoretical models. Therefore, we hereby construct a five-dimensional model of sustainable development based on “economy-society-environment-infrastructure-mechanism” (
Figure 1). Among them, the economy, society, and environment are components of a sustainable development system, while infrastructure and mechanism are the internal mechanisms that drive the operation of the system. The evaluation of economy, society, and environment mainly embodies the present situation and ability of system sustainable development. The assessment of infrastructure and mechanism emphasizes the hardware and software power or guarantee of the system, with sustainable development as its ultimate pursuit or goals. Within the system components (economy, society, and environment), the sustainable development of economy, society, and environment represents, respectively the foundation, the condition, and the goal for sustainable development. In other words, both economic growth and environmental protection are for social progress and improvement of human life quality and health level.
2.2. The Relationship between “B&R Initiative” and Sustainable Development
In essence, the “B&R Initiative” as an open, multi-national mechanism of regional cooperation is inherently integrated with sustainable development.
First, consistent goals: The “B&R Initiative” is a product of conformity to the multipolarization, economic globalization, cultural diversification, and social information trend of the world, and the adaptation to the new normal in the domestic economy. It aims to promote economic cooperation, regional connectivity and market integration among the countries along the “B&R”, so as to create a community of common interest, responsibility, and outcome featuring political mutual trust, economic integration, and cultural tolerance. Its emphasis on win-win cooperation and mutual benefit is inherently consistent with the goal of promoting sustainable development that is harmonious between people and between people and nature. Furthermore, the specific objectives of the “B&R Initiative”, such as promoting economic growth and social progress, safeguarding fairness and justice, and strengthening environmental protection, are precisely the keystones of the United Nations’ (UN’) 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda.
Second, consistent principles: There are three major principles for sustainable development: fairness, sustainability, and commonality. Among them, the principle of fairness mainly refers to the equality of opportunity choices, including the two aspects of intragenerational equity and intergenerational equity. The “B&R Initiative” also embodies the principle of fairness. For example, it is an open Initiative that gives access to not only geographically-related countries but also to all countries on an equal footing. In addition to complying with market rules in melon-cutting, it also contains the contents of international aid and others to fulfill its international obligations. The principle of sustainability refers to the moderate development, and principally, the rational utilization of resources, ecology, and the environment. The “B&R Initiative” embodies the principle of sustainability in at least two aspects: (1) focusing on environmental protection, since most of the countries along the “B&R” are laden with ecological problems, the Initiative proposes to uphold the concept of green development; and (2) promoting infrastructure construction to provide hardware support for sustainable development. The principle of commonality focuses primarily on integrity and interdependence. The “B&R” project needs the participants’ joint cooperation to achieve its ultimate goal of creating “Three Communities”. Therefore, this is not an Initiative led by or dominated by China. Rather, it is proposed by China with multinational participation and global benefit.
Third, consistent contents: In theory, the main contents of sustainable development include the three aspects of economic, social, and ecological sustainable development. Specifically, they are pursuing economic growth with better quality and efficiency, improving the quality of human life and protecting the earth’s ecological environment. The “B&R Initiative” is put forward in the context of China’s need to expand and deepen its opening up to the outside world, and the strong complementarity among the economies along the “B&R” and their strong willingness to cooperate. Its main content includes not only economic cooperation but also cultural exchanges. Based on this, the “B&R Initiative” has identified five key areas of cooperation: policy communication, facilities connectivity, trade liberalization, financing, and non-governmental exchange. Promoting the above “five keys areas” under the green development framework will not only promote the economic growth of all countries, but also improve the residents’ quality of life.
Fourth, similar paths: The realization of the goal of sustainable development needs the corresponding ability for support. From a path perspective, promoting the “B&R Initiative” is highly similar to achieving sustainable development. This is because the “B&R Initiative” has also enhanced the participating countries’ capacity in the sustainable development. Generally speaking, the capacity-building for sustainable development includes decision-making, management, a legal system, policy, science and technology, education, human resources, public participation, etc. It can be divided into two categories, one is for improvement of elements and the other is for improvement of mechanisms. The “B&R Initiative” can be achieved mainly through two major channels. The first is content construction. For example, the promotion of science, technology, education, and human resources in various countries can be optimized through facilities connectivity and trade liberalization, etc., while policy-making, management, legal systems, and policies of all countries can be strengthened through policy communication and non-governmental exchange so as to enhance public participation and achieve mechanism improvement. The second major channel is a cooperation mechanism by strengthening the capacity building of sustainable development through the spillover effect. The specific cooperation mechanisms include multi-level and multi-channel cooperation and consultation such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), China-ASEAN “10 + 1”, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), and other multilateral cooperation organizations, as well as the “Belt and Road” International Summit Forum, Boao Forum for Asia, and other cooperation platforms.
There are two main mechanisms for the impact of OFDI (Outward Foreign Direct Investment) on host country innovation (technology spillover). First, when the host country with a higher technology level: Regarding the positive externalities that result from geographical proximity to the technology leaders of the host countries, OFDIs of multinational corporations (MNCs) with less advanced technology are often motivated by the acquisition of advanced technology, which compels through market competition mechanisms the host-country enterprises to upkeep incessant innovation, thereby enhancing the overall innovation capability and level of the host countries. Second, when the host country has a lower technology level: MNCs with higher technical level usually have the advantage of monopoly, technology, advanced management experience, and economies of scale. After OFDI, the above advantages can spill over to the host country companies through learning mechanisms, personnel flow mechanisms, etc., thereby promoting the host country’s innovation ability and level.
There are also two situations in which OFDI impacts on home-country innovation (reverse technology spillover). First, when the home country has a higher technology level: From the perspective of product cycle, when the product is mature and standardized, OFDI can be made. On the one hand, when the next generation of products must be developed, the necessity will urge home countries to engage more in innovation; on the other hand, the OFDI at this stage is generally only for the sake of reducing the cost of factors or acquiring overseas markets. Due to the particularity of the host country’s market environment and factors of production, home-country enterprises will inevitably need to make corresponding technological improvements or innovations to raise the overall innovation level back home. For OFDI at an innovation phase of the product, home country enterprises typically aim at the lower research and development (R&D) costs, advertising costs, and market potential in the host country, which also encourage enterprise innovation, especially for applicable technical innovation in host country markets. Second, when the home country has a lower technology level. In this case, home-country enterprises’ direct investment in the host country can reduce their R&D costs by acquiring knowledge, especially tacit knowledge, through spillover effects. This saves money for home-based enterprises and enables them to invest more resources in domestic innovation, that is, R&D cost sharing; on the other hand, overseas R&D results will be fed back to home-country companies to further enhance the technological level and innovation capability back home, namely, feedback of R&D gain.
The above analysis is only directed at technological innovation. In fact, the impact of OFDI on innovation is also spread to institutional innovation, management innovation, business model innovation, format innovation, and cultural innovation, etc., through the same or similar channels or paths.