Project Landscapes and Public Perceptions of Chinese Economic Engagement: A Comparative Analysis of Zimbabwe and Laos

Abstract How do host-country publics evaluate Chinese economic engagement across contrasting project landscapes? This article compares Zimbabwe and Laos, two landlocked developing countries with close political and economic ties to China but markedly different geographical forms of Chinese engagement. Zimbabwe is characterized by resource- and corporate-centered investment in mining and energy, whereas Laos is shaped more visibly by transport infrastructure, especially the China–Laos Railway. Drawing on questionnaire surveys in Zimbabwe (n = 229) and Laos (n = 580), supplemented by fieldwork materials, the study compares five dimensions of public attitudes: affective perception, sovereignty trust, institutional comparison, perceived individual well-being, and future cooperation willingness. Two-sample t-tests show that Lao respondents score significantly higher across all five dimensions, with the largest differences in sovereignty trust, institutional comparison, and future cooperation. Interpreting these differences through place-specific project contexts, the findings indicate that resource-intensive engagement is associated with lower sovereignty trust and weaker perceived household benefits, while infrastructure-led engagement corresponds with stronger institutional endorsement and future cooperation support. Yet in both settings, perceived individual benefit lags behind support for continued cooperation. The findings highlight the importance of place-sensitive policies that respond to geographically differentiated project forms, local development narratives, and lived experiences of benefit.