The Diversity of Solidarity in South-South Cooperation: A Case of bapa+40

Abstract

Abstract Solidarity is a focal concept in the literature on South-South Cooperation ( ssc ). This research examines how solidarity is understood by actors involved in ssc . The literature on ssc is divided into two camps. The first camp believes that ssc is firmly grounded in solidarity. Meanwhile, the second camp holds that ssc is motivated by the state’s interest and that solidarity, if it occurs, is merely an epiphenomenon. However, this paper suggests that both camps fail to realize that the concept of solidarity manifests in different ways. Keeping this diversity in mind, a typology of solidarity based on Enlightenment ideas of liberty is utilized to systematically categorize the plurality of the concept. The typology maintains that solidarity can take shape in the form of Hobbesian self-centered solidarity, Kantian reflexive rational solidarity, Humean reflexive emotional solidarity, and Hegelian recognitive solidarity. This study analyses the Second High-Level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation ( bapa +40) opening speeches and general debate remarks. Types of solidarity are unmasked by examining 38 statements espoused by states, international organisations, and other entities. The findings show that Kantian solidarity is the most prevalent, followed by Hobbesian, Humean, and Hegelian solidarity. Three observations can be inferred in light of these findings. First , the discourse of solidarity in ssc is diverse and multiple. Second , different understandings of solidarity are not evenly distributed amongst statements made by actors of ssc . Some forms of solidarity are more salient. Third , the idea of solidarity is ambivalent. The four types of solidarity articulated are not mutually exclusive. Instead, they can appear simultaneously in actors’ articulation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.