1 The authors wish to thank the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (faperj) for funding the research for this article.E Mawdsley, From Recipients to Donors: Emerging Powers and the Changing Development Landscape, London: Zed Books, 2012.

2 R Greenhill, A Prizzon & A Rogerson, The Age of Choice: Developing Countries in the New Aid Landscape, Working Paper, London: Overseas Development Institute, 2013.

3 J Nederveen Pieterse, ‘Global rebalancing: crisis and the East–South turn’, Development and Change, 42(1), 2011, pp 24–48.

4 M Naím, ‘Rogue aid’, Foreign Policy, 1 March 2007, at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2007/02/14/rogue_aid.

5 G Chin & F Quadir, ‘Introduction: rising states, rising donors and the global aid regime’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 25(4), 2012, pp 493–506.

6 F Quadir, ‘Rising donors and the new narrative of “South–South” cooperation: what prospects for changing the landscape of development assistance programmes?’, Third World Quarterly, 34(3), 2013, pp 321–338.

7 P Morazán, I Knoke, D Knoblauch & T Schafer, ‘The role of brics in the developing world’, paper prepared for the European Union, Brussels, 2012.

8 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (oecd), ‘Aid to poor countries slips further as governments tighten budgets’, April 2013, at http://www.oecd.org/newsroom/aidtopoorcountriesslipsfurtherasgovernmentstightenbudgets.htm, accessed 5 May 2013.

9 D Chandler, ‘The security–development nexus and the rise of “anti-foreign policy”’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 10(4), 2007, pp 362–386.

10 J Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents, New York: WW Norton, 2002.

11 G Steiner-Khamsi, A Brave New World of ‘Emerging’ ‘Non- dac ’ Donors and their Differences from Traditional Donors, Policy Brief, Network for International Policies and Cooperation in Education and Training, 2010, at http://www.norrag.org/es/publications/boletin-norrag/online-version/a-brave-new-world-of-emerging-non-dac-donors-and-their-differences-from-traditional-donors/detail/north-south-south-cooperation-in-the-context-of-standardized-aid.html.

12 oecd, ‘Aid to poor countries slips further’.

13 Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Letter to the House of Representatives presenting the spearheads of development cooperation policy’, March 2011.

14 P Ladd, ‘Between a rock and a hard place: ldcs in a G-20 world’, Poverty in Focus, 20, 2010, pp 5–6.

15 J Walz & V Ramachandran, Brave New World: A Literature Review of Emerging Donors and the Changing Nature of Foreign Assistance, Center for Global Development Working Paper 273, Washington DC, November 2011.

16 dfid, ‘Research4Development Project Record: Evidence and Lessons from Latin America (ella)’, Research and Evidence Division, dfid, London, 2009.

17 C McEwan & E Mawdsley, ‘Trilateral development cooperation: power and politics in emerging aid relationships’, Development and Change, 43(6), 2012, pp 1185–1209.

18 Although we believe the dichotomy between Northern (‘traditional’) aid and Southern cooperation is exaggerated, and in many cases unwarranted, we use these categories because, analytically valid or not, they have been adopted widely (and thus, to an extent, reified) by a vast gamut of stakeholders in the field of development assistance.

19 E Mawdsley, L Savage & S Kim, ‘Post-aid world? Paradigm shift in foreign aid and development cooperation at the 2011 Busan High Level Forum’, Geographical Journal, January 2013.

20 Task Team on South–South Cooperation, ‘The Task Team on South–South Cooperation at a glance’, nd, at http://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/newfunct/pdf/tt-ssc_at_a_glance_20100605.pdf.

21 Mawdsley et al, “‘Post-aid world”?’.

22 A clearer picture should emerge after the first Partnership’s meeting, scheduled to occur in October 2013. At this point, the biggest difference between the Global Partnership and the Working Party on Aid Effectiveness seems to be that the Partnership does not have a direct link to the oecd. A specialist interviewed noted that, while this makes oecd less capable of imposing its pace in the agenda setting and implementation of the Partnership, it is also more difficult to blame it for possible unsuccessful developments. Moreover, there is usually a price to pay for greater inclusiveness in terms of objectivity and speed.

23 E Solheim, ‘Reflections on the future role of the dac and the challenges facing its new chair’, oecd, 2012, at http://www.oecd.org/dac/New%20DAC%20Chair_Solheim%20statement.pdf

24 World Bank Institute, ‘South–South Learning’, nd, at http://wbi.worldbank.org/wbi/south-south-learning.

25 United Nations Environment Programme, ‘unep South–South Cooperation Exchange Mechanism’, at http://www.unep.org/south-south-cooperation/unepssc/history.aspx.

26 N Watson, M Younis & S Spratt, ‘What next for the brics Bank? Rapid Response Briefing’, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, 2013.

27 Japan International Cooperation Agency, Scaling up South–South and Triangular Cooperation, conference proceedings, Tokyo: jica, 2012.

28 S Chatuverdi, ‘Characteristics and potential of triangular development cooperation (tdc): emerging trends, impact and future prospects’, Department and Social Affairs, United Nations Secretariat (undesa).

29 undp, Enhancing South–South and Triangular Cooperation, New York: undp, 2009; jica, Scaling up South–South and Triangular Cooperation; and giz, J Piefer, M Knodt, U Muller & L Ruther, Triangular Cooperation: A guideline for working in practice, Berlin: Nomos, 2012. GIZ stands for Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (no name in English).

30 Japan International Cooperation Agency, Good Practices of jica ’s Triangular Cooperation, Tokyo: jica, 2013.

31 jica, Scaling up South–South and Triangular Cooperation.

32 T Fordelone, ‘Triangular co-operation and aid effectiveness: can triangular co-operation make aid more effective?’, Development Co-operation Directorate, oecd, Paris, 2009.

33 NS Schulz, ‘Triangular cooperation in the context of aid effectiveness—experiences and views from European donors’, concept note and workshop report, Madrid, 2010.

34 International Trade Union Confederation, ‘Briefing note: what are South–South and Triangular Cooperation?’, 2012, at http://www.ituc-csi.org/briefing-note-what-are-south-south?lang=en.

35 H Rhee, ‘Promoting South–South cooperation through knowledge exchange’, in H Kharas, M Koji & J Woojin (eds), Catalyzing Development: A New Vision for Aid, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2011.

36 McEwan & Mawdsley, ‘Trilateral development cooperation’.

37 G Ashoff, Triangular Cooperation: Opportunities, Risks, and Conditions for Effectiveness, Special Report, Washington, DC: World Bank Institute, 2010.

38 jica, Scaling up South–South and Triangular Cooperation.

39 Ashoff, Triangular Cooperation, BMZ ‘Triangular cooperation in German development cooperation,’ BMZ Strategy Paper 5, Berlin, 2013. BMZ stands for Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development.

40 Fordelone, ‘Triangular cooperation and aid effectiveness’.

41 Ashoff, Triangular Cooperation.

42 gdi 2007, p 2. At the same time, it is important to note that Northern donors participating in triangular cooperation may themselves be reshaped by its increasing engagement in South–South cooperation. Through its engagement in triangular cooperation Japan has boosted its discourse of ownership in cooperation, claiming, for instance, that the Tokyo International Conference on African Development (ticad) ‘is founded on an approach that seeks to avoid the top-down hierarchy of the donor–recipient model and to opt instead for African ownership and international partnership’. Shinzo Abe, ‘Japan is Committed to Africa’s Development’, The Wall Street Journal, 30 May 2013, at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324412604578514140138624334.html, accessed 16 August 2013.

43 D F da Costa et al, ‘Triangular co-operation for government capacity development in South Sudan’, NOREF Policy Brief, Oslo, May 2013.

44 Japan International Cooperation Agency, Good Practices of jica ’s Triangular Cooperation; H Asche & M Schuller, ‘China’s Engagement in Africa: Opportunities and Risks for Development’, Bonn: Africa Department, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), 2008.

45 gtz, ‘China’s engagement in Africa—opportunities and risks for development’, Africa Department, Economic Affairs, 2008, p 12.

46 The formation of the China–dac Study Group may have had some influence on that process. With a focus in Africa, it aims to ‘share knowledge and exchange experiences on promoting growth and reducing poverty in developing countries, including how international assistance can be effective in supporting this objective’. dac, nd. Notwithstanding this, Stahl also points out that the influence of the China–dac Study Group has been limited both by the fact that it has no power to promote binding agreements and because China is not willing to participate formally in the oecd, which could lead to the questioning of its status as a developing country and provider of ssc. AK Stahl, ‘Trilateral development cooperation between European Union, China and Africa: what prospects for South Africa?’, Discussion Paper, Center for Chinese Studies, Stellenbosch University, 2012.

47 AE Abdenur & DM Souza Neto, A cooperação brasileira em saúde em Moçambique, Working Paper, Rio de Janeiro: brics Policy Center, 2013.

48 P Sinha & M Hubbard, ‘dac (traditional) & non dac (emerging) donors at the crossroads: the problem of export credits’, paper prepared for the ‘Rethinking Development in an Age of Scarcity and Uncertainty’ conference, University of York, 19–22 September 2011.

49 J Xu & RH Carey, ‘The renaissance of public entrepreneurship: governing development finance in a transforming world’, Background Research Paper submitted to the High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, 2013.

50 In discussing South–South/triangular cooperation and capacity development, Akio Hosono, jica’s senior research adviser, states that ‘rather than simply transfer technology, the idea is that donors participate in learning and co-creation as actors entering from outside, and can contribute to capacity development by fulfilling the role of catalysts as facilitators’. On another page the author states that ‘normally, knowledge exchange is emphasized as a method of South–South/Triangular cooperation, but from these examples we can go further and see the importance of cooperation directed at mutual learning, collaborative problem-solving, and the co-creation of innovative technologies and expertise’. A Hosono, ‘South–South/triangular cooperation and capacity development’, in jica, Scaling up South–South Cooperation, pp 49–64.