## 2 Comparison of BRI with Other Global and Regional Infrastructure Initiatives
### Inclusivity and Regional Integration  
It has been argued that the BRI tends to exclude domestic contractors from participating in infrastructure projects, with 89% being Chinese companies, while the U.S., European and Japanese counter-initiatives are allowed for more consideration towards the needs of and benefits to the local economy ([PERSON] and [PERSON], 2021). One example concerns the Gwadar port of Pakistan, which is the key structural link of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor under the BRI. The construction of the Gwadar Eastbay Expressway had a negative impact on the economic well-being of fishermen by restricting their access to the sea, and such developmental decisions were made without adequate local consultation and impact assessments ([PERSON] et al., 2022). Another example concerns the Muse-Mandalay Railroad project in Myanmar, whereby the \"consultation process\" was generally one-sided (just the presentation of the economic benefits) and only with community representatives rather with than the local communities directly affected by the construction of the railroad ([PERSON] et al., 2020). Such dynamics are not unique to Pakistan and Myanmar and might be observed in other developing countries participating in the BRI due to the favouring of larger economic players who possess strong informal networks with political elites or Chinese investment partners. This poses barriers to local firms without such connections and have no ethically Chinese representatives, exacerbated by limited capital and technical expertise. Thus, the opaque decision-making and limited community engagement of BRI projects may foster NIMBY syndrome rooted in the perceived erosion of local ownership and economic benefit. Initiatives such as PGII/BDN, GG, FOIP/PQI, and 3 SI emphasise integration through a rational-legal perspective, establishing a rule-based order to promote organisational and institutional efficiency. These frameworks encourage participating countries to align with established norms and engage in broad cooperation ([PERSON], 2021). This emphasis is grounded in the understanding that promoting quality infrastructure depends heavily on regulatory harmonisation and standardisation. Coordinating across sectors, borders, and jurisdictions requires predictable institutional frameworks that support long-term governance and sustainability goals. Such alignment enables the integration of diverse regional policies into cohesive infrastructure systems, particularly in sectors like energy,water, and transport, and provides the stability needed for innovations such as green technologies to thrive ([PERSON], 2024). In contrast, the BRI often relies on non-binding memorandums of understanding (MoUs) focused on maintaining sovereignty and process-oriented cooperation toward specific goals, which, in theory at least, allows for some flexibility in adapting to the domestic priorities of host countries ([PERSON], 2021). This draws parallels with the BRI's strong emphasis on cooperation as mentioned in Section 2.1, suggesting a discrepancy between actual implementation and participatory ideals regarding BRI projects. It can be argued that some of these alternative initiatives may provoke a different kind of NIMBY syndrome, i.e., resistance towards normative expectations such as environmental conditionality, anti-corruption benchmarks, or human rights clauses, which may be perceived by recipients as externally imposed and misaligned with local developmental priorities or institutional capacities. For example, unlike the BRI, which does not impose the requirement of participating countries to adopt liberal democratic norms, the cooperation mechanism for the diffusion of EU's connectivity policies' norms under GG appears to be \"coercive\" and \"non-reflexive\" in nature, based on an analysis of EU communications and official documents on this issue. Communications of GG's principles and values to beneficiaries are structured unilaterally, emphasising adherence and conformity.