Many readers will remember the controversy sparked by the signing of a $2.7 billion investment agreement in the “blue economy” sector on September 5, 2018, in Beijing, on the sidelines of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC). The agreement was concluded between the Malagasy Agency for Economic Development and Business Promotion (AMDP) and the Chinese investor consortium Taihe Century Investment Developments Co. Ltd (太和世纪（北京）投资发展有限公司).
How did these two entities come to sign such a deal in Beijing ? AMDP representatives have publicly stated on several occasions—through press releases and meetings with civil society organizations—that other companies were approached to carry the project, but only Taihe agreed to invest, allegedly aligning with AMDP’s “values,” including a commitment to local development. According to AMDP, Taihe consists of a family of entrepreneurs with a long-standing history in shipbuilding.
Who Is Behind Taihe?
Echoing the selection of Ferrum Mining as a partner for Kraoma S.A., the partnership with Taihe was initiated with little transparency and without a public tender process. AMDP responded to criticism by claiming that full disclosure of the agreement was unnecessary, as both parties were private entities and solely accountable to each other. Despite its name, which suggests a public institution, AMDP is registered in Madagascar as a private law association.
However, the involvement of the former president in AMDP’s structure and the scale of the agreement contradict this assertion. The projects outlined in the agreement clearly require significant involvement from state authorities—at the very least for the issuance of fishing licenses.
An investigation conducted in collaboration with the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) via its “Investigative Dashboard” platform uncovered information that casts serious doubt on AMDP’s claims and raises concerns about the credibility of Taihe.
Initially, Taihe was headquartered in Haidian District, Beijing (No. -028, 8th Floor, No. 9 North Fourth Ring Road) until January 2018, when it moved to Chaoyang District (908, 9th Floor, Building 2, No. 10, Wangjing Street). Yet, administrative authorities in both districts reported that the company was unreachable, resulting in Taihe being listed on the national registry of “business irregularities” in 2015 and again in 2018, under Article 9 of the Interim Measures for the Management of Business Exceptions. This registry documents companies that fail to meet disclosure or compliance obligations with administrative authorities.
Our own attempts to contact Taihe by phone were unsuccessful. The company shares its phone number with two unrelated firms, as well as with a third company in which Taihe is the majority shareholder:
At the time of the agreement’s signing, Mr. Miao Jirong (also spelled Miu or Yan; 缪晋荣 in simplified Chinese)—often written as Jinrong—was Taihe’s manager, executive director, 99% majority shareholder, and legal representative. Mr. Li Gang (李钢) was the supervisor and minority shareholder. Ten days later, Mr. Jirong was replaced by Mr. Chen Chun (陈春) in all executive roles, for reasons unknown. Contrary to AMDP’s claims, Taihe is not a consortium of seven companies, but rather a company with only two shareholders.
Years of Experience in the Blue Economy?
Taihe is an investment firm. Yet none of the companies it invested in prior to the AMDP agreement had any record of activity in shipbuilding or the blue economy. This is also true for the other firms previously managed or co-owned by Mr. Jirong and Mr. Gang.
As of September 5, 2018—the day the agreement was signed—Taihe held shares in only two companies:
Mr. Jirong also held personal shares in three now-defunct companies and one that remains active:
Mr. Gang held various roles in the companies mentioned above. The only traceable link between Taihe and the blue economy involves Mr. Guo Zhenzhong (郭振忠), who co-directed Beijing Hengtai Weiye Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. with Mr. Jirong between 2000 and 2010. Mr. Zhenzhong owns shares in Fu’an Huanian Ship Development Co., Ltd. (福安市环澳船舶发展有限公司), a shipbuilding company, and sits on the board of Debon Logistics Co., Ltd. (德邦物流股份有限公司), which operates in maritime transport.
However, if Fu’an were to provide shipbuilding services to Taihe under the AMDP agreement, it would raise concerns, as the company was implicated in a money-laundering scheme exposed in 2018.
Fujian Julong Fishery
Only weeks after the deal’s signing, on September 25, 2018, Fujian Julong Fishery Co., Ltd. (福建聚龙渔业有限公司), a fishing company, was registered in China. Taihe holds an 80% stake, with the remaining shares held by Mr. Chen Deming (陈德明), who also serves as the company’s supervisor. Mr. Cai Yijian (蔡箫剑) is the executive director and general manager.
It is evident that Fujian was established specifically to implement the AMDP agreement. This undermines AMDP’s claims that the partnership involved a seasoned consortium with years of experience in the blue economy. In fact, none of the individuals associated with Taihe appear qualified to lead such an ambitious initiative.
Miao Jirong
The primary figure from Taihe mentioned in official press releases, Mr. Jirong projects the image of an established businessman. However, Taihe’s registered capital at the time of signing was just under $1.5 million—meaning the initial phase of the AMDP project was worth 500 times that amount. On the same day that Mr. Jirong was replaced by Mr. Chun, Taihe’s registered capital was increased fifteenfold to nearly $25 million. Notably, the actual paid-in capital remained unchanged.
Even more troubling, Taihe’s last two annual reports declared neither revenue nor profit. Worse still, in January 2018, Mr. Jirong was listed by the Jiaocheng District People’s Court of Ningde (China) as a “dishonest person subject to enforcement,” due to personal debts exceeding $1.2 million.
Did AMDP officials fail to assess their partner’s credibility before entering into such a large-scale agreement? Or were they aware of Taihe’s questionable background and chose to proceed anyway? Emails to AMDP officials went unanswered. A formal investigation by competent authorities, particularly BIANCO, would help shed light on the true motivations behind the deal—and determine whether corruption played a role.
A Telling Comparison
In conclusion, it is worth reflecting on a similarly opaque 2011 fisheries agreement between Mauritania’s then-president Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz and the Chinese company Poly Hon Done Pelagic Fisheries Co. Ltd. (宏东渔业股份有限公司), also known as Poly Hong Dong Pelagic Fisheries Co. Ltd. or Fuzhou Hong Dong Pelagic Fisheries Co. Ltd. The company was accused of causing serious environmental damage and depleting Mauritanian fish stocks.
Following the agreement, Mauritania’s fish exports surged—from $292 million in 2010 to $810 million in 2017. Foreign firms found it far more profitable to convert fish into fishmeal for aquaculture rather than sell it on local markets. Fishmeal exports from Mauritania jumped from 35,000 tons in 2010 to nearly 120,000 tons in 2017, with nearly 50,000 tons (42%) destined for China.
If Madagascar were to implement a similar agreement, it risks facing the same outcome. Though the full AMDP–Taihe deal was never disclosed, based on the planned number of vessels, estimated annual catch would total around 43,000 tons—of which only 15% would supply the local market. By comparison, the 2007 fisheries agreement between Madagascar and the European Union—renewed in 2014—involved a catch volume three times smaller.
Is this truly a case of developing the blue economy, or is Madagascar surrendering its marine resources to the Chinese market?
The author wishes to thank Jelter Meers of the Investigative Dashboard, an initiative of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), for his invaluable assistance in the investigation leading to the writing of this article.
