[Answered] Justify South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) as a pathway to an equitable and sustainable future. Evaluate its efficacy in contrast to traditional North-South aid models.

Introduction

UNCTAD (2024) highlights widening inequalities despite trillions in North-South aid since the 1960s. Against this backdrop, South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SSTC) emerges as a demand-driven, frugal, and context-sensitive development model.

Why SSTC Matters Today

1. 2030 Agenda urgency: With less than 6 years to achieve the SDGs, resource gaps exceed $4 trillion annually (OECD 2023). Traditional aid flows are declining.
2. Principles: Solidarity, mutual respect, horizontal learning (Buenos Aires Plan of Action, 1978).
3. Comparative Advantage: Replicability, cost-effectiveness, and contextual relevance compared to donor-driven North-South aid.

India as a Key Champion of SSTC

1. Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam philosophy and role as Global South voice.
2. Institutional mechanisms: Development Partnership Administration (2012), Indian Technical and Economic Cooperation (ITEC) programme (capacity building in 160+ countries).
3. India-UN Development Partnership Fund (2017): 75+ projects across 56 countries, particularly in LDCs and SIDS.
4. Digital Public Goods: Aadhaar, UPI, CoWIN shared globally as Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI).
5. Food Security Partnership with WFP: Innovations like Annapurti grain ATMs, fortified rice, and women-led Take-Home Ration programme, now replicated in Nepal and Lao PDR.

Triangular Cooperation (SSTC+ Model)

1. Blending resources of North and South: e.g., India-Japan-UNDP projects in Africa, India-USAID cooperation on vaccines and solar projects.
2. Wider stakeholder base: Civil society, private sector, grassroots communities → people-centric development.
3. Efficacy: In 2024, WFP mobilised $10.9 million from Global South countries + private sector for SSTC projects aligned with SDG-2 (Zero Hunger).

Efficacy vs Traditional North-South Aid Models

1. Traditional North-South aid: Often top-down, conditional, reinforcing donor-dependency. Criticised for “aid tied to procurement” and neo-colonial overtones. Limited sustainability once funding ends.
2. SSTC Advantage:

• Demand-driven: Projects based on recipient country needs.
• Frugal and replicable: e.g., India’s solar microgrids in Africa.
• Peer-to-peer trust: Shared developmental challenges enable horizontal cooperation.

1. Limitations of SSTC: Funding scale still modest compared to OECD-DAC flows. Institutional frameworks for monitoring and accountability remain underdeveloped.

Global Relevance and Way Forward

1. Climate Action: IBSA Fund projects on renewable energy in Guinea-Bissau.
2. Pandemic Response: India’s “Vaccine Maitri” supplied vaccines to 100+ countries, reflecting South-led solidarity.
3. Blue Economy & Resilience: India’s projects in Pacific Islands.

Way Forward:

1. Expand knowledge-sharing platforms.
2. Strengthen South-led financing institutions (like New Development Bank, BRICS Bank).
3. Mainstream Triangular cooperation to mobilise larger resources.
4. Build impact assessment mechanisms for accountability.

Conclusion

As Joseph Stiglitz notes, “globalisation must be reimagined to serve all.” SSTC, if scaled and institutionalised, can transform solidarity into sustainable outcomes, ensuring equitable progress in a multipolar world.