UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres (C, front) speaks at the 46th Annual Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the Group of 77 and China at the UN headquarters in New York on Sept. 23, 2022. (Xinhua/Wang Ying)

The "Global South" has been a hot topic in various global political and economic discussions, as evidenced by its increasing usage in academic literature and media references.

For instance, the "Global South" was featured on the agenda at the Group of Seven Summit in Japan last month. And since 2022, 55 articles in the journal Foreign Affairs either use "Global South" as a title to discuss major events or as a framing of present-day change in world events.

As the terms "North" and "South" emerged closely associated with the geopolitical divisions during the Cold War, the "South" has multiple meanings.

Firstly, it is used as a synonym for poverty and underdevelopment, representing regions that rely on economic assistance and policy guidance from the "North" for their development.

Additionally, it refers to postcolonial countries that, having gained sovereignty and independence, showcased collective political and diplomatic behavior within multilateral international organizations like the United Nations.

In deliberations about world political-economic change, the usage of "Global South," "North," and "South" reflects the controversies over international development issues.

Take the UN-led Development Decades since 1960s.

The main objective of the First Development Decade was to promote economic growth in developing countries, which was in line with what poor countries were striving for.

That of the second decade was to establish a new world economic and social order and the third's emphasis on the right to development marked the shift from offering the "South" aids to shaping norms and rules.

The fourth turned to stress sustainable development and put an end to the idea of the "North" providing assistance for the "South" in achieving the latter's economic goals.

Passage of the 2023 Global Sustainable Development Report made it more clear that middle- and low-income economies are encouraged or required to be self-sufficient.

Meanwhile, it is worth noting that the term "Global South" is not exclusively used by the "North."

South-South cooperation began with the Bandung Conference in 1955 and gained prominence with the establishment of the Group of 77 in 1964. Back then, the cooperation focused on national independence, sovereign equality and assistance from former colonial powers.

However, the emphasis evolved to prioritize economic growth and social welfare in less developed countries through means other than economic aid, including the promotion of technology transfer and cross-border investments.

As such, reference to "Global South" by elites in developing countries, as well as some UN institutions, was meant to serve as a reminder of the morality, universality and complexity behind the call for narrowing the North-South gap.

But the momentum of the South-South cooperation began to wane in 1980s.

In the four decades prior, the "small dragon" economies of East Asia (commonly known as "Four Asian Tigers" in English) successfully expanded niche markets in the global economy and stepped into the industrialization stage. In contrast, economies in Latin America operated under the logic of international division of labor with developed ones and suffered from short-term boom in growth but falling into "middle-income trap."

In the latter half of the Cold War, parallel to the "West-East trade," South-South trade gradually gained scale.

Therefore, the persuasiveness of collective negotiations to facilitate "North-South dialogue" and "North-South cooperation" declined. The concept of autonomous development became the mainstream consciousness among developing countries.

Into the 21st century, as an approach to international development governance, South-South cooperation regained widespread recognition. For example, the United Nations promulgated the International South-South Cooperation Day in 2003, established its Office for South-South Cooperation in 2013, and convened a high-level conference on South-South cooperation in 2015.

The revival has been reflected in the increased use of the term "Global South" in academic literature and media.

Some U.S. and European universities re-titled their teaching and research programs from "International Development" to "Global Development." This reflects an understanding that when it comes to development issues worldwide, the inertia of thinking that the "North" provides examples and assistance should be abandoned.

The following factors may provide a reasonable explanation for the increasing frequency of "Global South."

Firstly, the use of the term as a geographical reference is the least controversial. Dividing the world along the equator, the majority of countries in the southern half, both in the past and at present, exhibit significant disparities in societal conditions compared to the northern half.

Secondly, the changed understanding of anthropo-sociology plays an important role. The "North" superiority in cultural, religious, political and economic systems, and even race declined, and clusters of socio-economic malaise are existent in North America and Western Europe.

The term "Global South" serves as a reminder that the attractiveness of the cultural or civilizational superiority inherent in the "North" is declining if not fading in the "South."

Thirdly, the increasing use of the term also represents serious questioning of the explanatory power of conventional thinking in development economics as an academic discipline.

American economist Walt Rostow, in his book, The Stages of Economic Growth, stated that all economies regardless of specific historical backgrounds go through the same stages of development, suggesting that structural inequality in international economic relations was a non-issue.

In other words, the "North" does not necessarily feel morally inadequate or deficient as the "South" continues to face persistent development challenges.

Now that the term "Global South" is gaining renewed popularity, there is still no consensus over associated meanings and implications.

The questions below are worth pondering.

Why have economies, including China, been able to achieve growth in terms of their economic size and share of global GDP, against various odds in terms of geopolitical and geo-economic conditions?

Why do some middle- and low-income countries no longer place a heavy emphasis on the "beacon effect" of the "North?"

As more and more South countries draw on lessons from alternative development approaches including those by China, is it becoming difficult for the "North" to keep their edge?

Zha Daojiong is a professor of International Political Economy, School of International Studies and the Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development, Peking University.