009 [자료집]oecd peer review 와 한국 oda의 개선방안 by KoFID

목

차

목

Ⅰ. 프로그램

Ⅱ. 발제문

[발제1] 2012 한국의 OECD DAC Peer Review----------------------------------------

(박수덕 국무총리실 개발협력정책관실 대외협력 과장)

차

[발제1] 2012 한국의 OECD DAC Peer Review----------------------------------------

(박수덕 국무총리실 개발협력정책관실 대외협력 과장)

[발제 참고자료1] OECD/DAC Peer Review 절차 ------------------------------------

[발제 참고자료2] 메모랜덤 요약 ------------------------------------------------------

[발제 참고자료3] 2012 Memorandum for the DAC Peer Review----------------------

Ⅲ. 참고자료

[2008 DAC Special Peer Review]

1. DAC Special Review of KOREA ---------------------------------------------------

2. 한국의 OECD/DAC 가입을 위한 DAC 특별심사[KOICA 국제개발협력2008년 3호] --129

[시민사회]

1. DAC Special Review of KOREA ---------------------------------------------------

2. 한국의 OECD/DAC 가입을 위한 DAC 특별심사[KOICA 국제개발협력2008년 3호] --129

[시민사회]

1. 2012년 ODA정책의 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 의견서 [참여연대] -----------

141

1. 2012년 ODA정책의 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 의견서 [참여연대] -----------

141

2. 19대 국회에서 다루어야 할 15대 ODA 개혁과제--------------------------------

157

2. 19대 국회에서 다루어야 할 15대 ODA 개혁과제--------------------------------

157

3. 2012년 DAC 동료검토를 앞둔 한국 ODA에 대한 ODA Watch의 사전동료검토 요약보고서[ODA WATCH] ----------------------------------------------------------

3. 2012년 DAC 동료검토를 앞둔 한국 ODA에 대한 ODA Watch의 사전동료검토 165

요약보고서[ODA WATCH] ----------------------------------------------------------

165

Ⅰ. 프로그램

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

2012년 5월 23일 (수)

09:40-10:00

도착 및 등록

09:40-10:00

도착 및 등록

10:00-10:10

프로그램 및 참석자 소개

10:00-10:10

프로그램 및 참석자 소개

윤현봉 한국해외원조단체협의회 사무총장 10:00-11:30

<사회> 이성훈 코피드 국제위원장 / 한국인권재단 상임이사

윤현봉 한국해외원조단체협의회 사무총장 10:00-11:30

<사회> 이성훈 코피드 국제위원장 / 한국인권재단 상임이사

<기조발제>

박수덕 국무총리실 개발협력정책관실 대외협력 과장

<라운드 테이블>

양영미 코피드 정책위원장 / 참여연대 국제연대위원장

김윤주 굿네이버스 아시아권역 본부장

이철 외교통상부 개발정책과 ODA 선진화 실무지원팀장

박주언 기획재정부 개발협력과 사무관

남부원 해원협 국제협력위원장 / 한국YMCA전국연맹 사무총장

이태주 한성대 교수 / ODA Watch 대표

11:30-11:45

휴식

11:30-11:45

휴식

11:45-12:30

질의응답 및 전체토론

11:45-12:30

질의응답 및 전체토론

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[발제]

2012 한국 OECD DAC Peer Review

박수덕 (국무총리실 개발협력정책관실 대외협력과장)

참고자료1. OECD/DAC Peer Review 절차

참고자료2. 메모랜덤 요약

참고자료3. 2012 Memorandum for the DAC Peer Review

해원협, 12.5.23) 해원협 KoFID, KoFID ODA Watch 정책토론회( 정책토론회(‘12 5 23)

2012 한국의 OECD DAC Peer Review

해원협, 12.5.23) 해원협 KoFID, KoFID ODA Watch 정책토론회( 정책토론회(‘12 5 23)

2012 한국의 OECD DAC Peer Review

국무총리실

개발협력정책관실

1. OECD DAC Peer Review 개관

2. 2012년 한국 Peer Review 개요

3. 한국 Peer Review의 주안점

4. Peer Review 메모랜덤 주요내용

5. 한국 Peer Review의 의의

-9-

OECD DAC Peer Review 개관

Peer Review 개요

OECD DAC Peer Review 개관

Peer Review 개요

목적

OECD 운영의 핵심 메커니즘으로 회원국간 개발협력 정책 및 집행체제에 대한 상호 검토를 통해 서로의 정책 및 제도 개선을 도모

* DAC는 매년 4-5개의 4 5개의 회원국을 대상국으로 선정, 선정 Peer P Review실시 R i 실시

금년에는 한국, EU, 캐나다, 핀란드, 프랑스에 대한 Peer Review 실시

To what end?

- Accountability (against commitments)

- Learning (good practice, guidance)

Improving the

- Learning (good practice, guidance)

Improving the

- Advancing reforms, changing behaviours

Impact of aid

- Advancing reforms, changing behaviours

Impact of aid

- Improving aid system

- 10 -

Peer Review 검토대상

• OECD DAC Peer Review Content Guide 6개 주요 검토항목

개발협력 기조, 정책 및 전략 (Strategic Orientations)

개발을 위한 정책일관성 (PCD : Policy Coherence for Development)

ODA 규모, 채널 및 배분 (ODA Volume, Channels and Allocations)

ODA 관련 조직 및 관리 체계 (Organization and Management)

원조 효과성과 성과 (Aid Effectiveness and Results)

인도적 지원 (Humanitarian Assistance)

* 금번 Peer Review는 2010년 DAC 정식회원국 가입 후 처음 실시 DAC 가입준비를 위한 Special Peer Review(2008년)와 DAC 가입심사(2009년)시 주요 권고사항들의 개선사항을 중심으로 심사가 이루어질 것으로 예상

Peer Review 수행방식

Preparation, Planning

Fact-finding Analysis, Report writing

Peer Review 수행방식 HQ consultations Field mission

Preparation, Planning

Memorandum Follow-up (mid-term review))

Fact-finding Analysis, Report writing

HQ consultations Field mission

Memorandum

Peer Review meeting

심사자 (examiners) - 2개 개 주검 주검토국 국

Follow-up (mid-term review))

Peer Review meeting

- DAC 의장 - 사무국

Publication

- 2개 개 주검 주검토국 국 - DAC 의장 - 사무국

Publication

* Observer국

- 11 -

심사자 (examiners)

* Observer국

- 11 -

Peer Review 일정표

동료평가 6개월 전

동료평가 4~5개월전

동료평가 3~5개월전

동료평가 1~3개월전

준비

수검국 실사

수원국 실사점검

보고서 작성

역할

사무국

․ 준비회의 참여

․실사 1개월전까지 서 한과 내용작성지침 ( (Content Guide)) 송부 ․수검국과 방문단 일정 조율

․방문일정 검토 ․실사단 참여

평가단

․메모랜덤 DAC 제출 ․연간 통계보고 제출

․사무국과 조율하여 전체 회의 어젠다 조율 ․현지이동 지원 및 방문 협조

수검국

동료평가 이후

․발표회 참여

․주요내용 초안 작성 주도, OLIS 등록, 번역 요청 ․Part 1은 평가회의 2주전 완료 ․Part 2는 평가회의 2~4주전 완료

․동료평가회의에서 수 원국 현장방문 결과 보 고 ․ 편 집 세 션 주재(동료평가회의 익일 오전)

․최종보고서 OLIS등록 ․발간물 관리 ․후속조치과정에 의장 보좌

․방문일정 검토 ․실사 참여 ․현장방문보고서 검토

․보고서에 대한 검토 의견 기여/특히 part 1 에 대한 동의/초안에 대한 의견 제시

․Part 1 이슈에 대한 토론 주도 ․DAC 을 대 표 하 여 편집세션 참여

․사무국과 협의, 방문 수원국 선정, 정부내부 에 통지 ․관련 당사자들과 회 의 일 정 수 립 , 프로그램 사무국에 송부 ․현지이동 지원 준비

․OLIS 등록전 Part 2 초안 사실관계 확인

․ 평 가 단 과 DAC 에 서 제기하는 이슈와 질문 에 답변 ․편집세션 편집세션 참가

․실사 1개월전까지 서 한과 내용작성지침 ( (Content Guide)) 송부 ․수검국 현장직원과 방문일정 조율

․18~24개월후 수검국 후속점검방문

동료평가 4~5개월전

동료평가 3~5개월전

동료평가 1~3개월전

준비

수검국 실사

수원국 실사점검

보고서 작성

․평가국(2개) 선정 ․평가단계획전반 조율 ․ 통 계 국 - 수 검 국 비공식 조율

․실사 1개월전까지 서 한과 내용작성지침 ( (Content Guide)) 송부 ․수검국과 방문단 일정 조율

․ 준비회의 참여

․방문일정 검토 ․실사단 참여

평가단

․출판물 주문(필요시) ․인터넷판 보고서 요청(필요시) ․발표회 초청/후속점검 자료준비/의장 점검일정 협의

․메모랜덤 DAC 제출 ․연간 통계보고 제출

․사무국과 조율하여 전체 회의 어젠다 조율 ․현지이동 지원 및 방문 협조

수검국

동료평가회의 및 편집 세션

동료평가 이후 발간 및 후속조치

․평가단, 사무국과 함 께 안건 상정(회의 1일 전) ․동료평가회의 주재 ․보도자료 발간

․발표회 참여

․주요내용 초안 작성 주도, OLIS 등록, 번역 요청 ․Part 1은 평가회의 2주전 완료 ․Part 2는 평가회의 2~4주전 완료

․동료평가회의에서 수 원국 현장방문 결과 보 고 ․ 편 집 세 션 주재(동료평가회의 익일 오전)

․최종보고서 OLIS등록 ․발간물 관리 ․후속조치과정에 의장 보좌

․방문일정 검토 ․실사 참여 ․현장방문보고서 검토

․보고서에 대한 검토 의견 기여/특히 part 1 에 대한 동의/초안에 대한 의견 제시

․Part 1 이슈에 대한 토론 주도 ․DAC 을 대 표 하 여 편집세션 참여

․사무국과 협의, 방문 수원국 선정, 정부내부 에 통지 ․관련 당사자들과 회 의 일 정 수 립 , 프로그램 사무국에 송부 ․현지이동 지원 준비

․OLIS 등록전 Part 2 초안 사실관계 확인

․ 평 가 단 과 DAC 에 서 제기하는 이슈와 질문 에 답변 ․편집세션 편집세션 참가

DAC 의장

사무국

2012년 한국 Peer Review 개요

- 12 -

동료평가 6개월 전 역할

발간 및 후속조치

․평가단, 사무국과 함 께 안건 상정(회의 1일 전) ․동료평가회의 주재 ․보도자료 발간

DAC 의장

․평가국(2개) 선정 ․평가단계획전반 조율 ․ 통 계 국 - 수 검 국 비공식 조율

동료평가회의 및 편집 세션

․실사 1개월전까지 서 한과 내용작성지침 ( (Content Guide)) 송부 ․수검국 현장직원과 방문일정 조율

․18~24개월후 수검국 후속점검방문

․출판물 주문(필요시) ․인터넷판 보고서 요청(필요시) ․발표회 초청/후속점검 자료준비/의장 점검일정 협의

2012년 한국 Peer Review 개요

- 12 -

2012년 한국 Peer Review 일정 일정

심사단 심사단 구성 (총 9명)

• 메모랜덤 제출 : 5.7

- DAC 사무국 4명 - 검토국 (호주, 독일) 대표자 : 각 2명씩 - 옵저버국 (칠레) 대표자 : 1명

• 심사단 방한 : 6.11-15 6 11 15

심사단 방한 (6.11-15)

• 협력국 방문 : 6.18-22

- 국제개발협력 정책·집행기관 정책 집행기관 방문

심사단 심사단 구성 (총 9명)

• 메모랜덤 제출 : 5.7

- DAC 사무국 4명 - 검토국 (호주, 독일) 대표자 : 각 2명씩 - 옵저버국 (칠레) 대표자 : 1명

• 심사단 방한 : 6.11-15 6 11 15

심사단 방한 (6.11-15)

• 협력국 방문 : 6.18-22

- 국제개발협력 정책·집행기관 정책 집행기관 방문

* 총리실, 기재부, 외교부, KOICA, EDCF

• DAC 평가회의 및

- 여타부처 관계자 면담(PCD, 범정부 접근)

* 총리실, 기재부, 외교부, KOICA, EDCF

• DAC 평가회의 및

- 여타부처 관계자 면담(PCD, 범정부 접근)

* 복지부, 농식품부, 국방부, 환경부, 노동부 등

검토보고서 작성 : 10월 - 11월 • 종합 검토회의 : 12.5 12 5

- 국회, 감사원, 시민사회(NGO, 학계 등) 방문

심사단 협력국 방문 (6.18 (6 18-22) 22)

(2011.12-2012.12)

* 현지 사무소, 정부 인사 등 면담 예정

• 해원협 민관간담회 (4.17) • 개발정책학회(5.15)

메모랜덤 작성 T/F 운영

• ODA Watch 정책포럼

방문 준비

(5.18) • Peer Review 토론회 (5 23) (5.23)

심사단 협력국 방문 (6.18 (6 18-22) 22)

* 현지 사무소, 정부 인사 등 면담 예정

수검전략 및 대책 수립

• 심사단 방한 및 수원국

• 종합 검토회의 : 12.5 12 5

- 국회, 감사원, 시민사회(NGO, 학계 등) 방문

- 캄보디아

시민사회와의 협력

• 범정부 수검준비반 설치

검토보고서 작성 : 10월 - 11월

- 캄보디아

2012년 한국 Peer Review 준비현황 정부

* 복지부, 농식품부, 국방부, 환경부, 노동부 등

2012년 한국 Peer Review 준비현황 DAC과의 협력

• DAC 사무국과 사전 점검회의 (2.2, 파리) • 메모랜덤 제출 (5.7) 및 심사단 방한계획

시민사회와의 협력

정부 • 범정부 수검준비반 설치 (2011.12-2012.12)

점검협의 (5.15, 파리)

(4.17)

수검전략 및 대책 수립

• 개발정책학회(5.15)

메모랜덤 작성 T/F 운영

• ODA Watch 정책포럼

수립 협의 • DAC 사무국과 중간

• 해원협 민관간담회

• 심사단 방한 및 수원국 방문 준비

(5.18) • Peer Review 토론회 (5 23) (5.23)

DAC과의 협력 • DAC 사무국과 사전 점검회의 (2.2, 파리) • 메모랜덤 제출 (5.7) 및 심사단 방한계획 수립 협의 • DAC 사무국과 중간 점검협의 (5.15, 파리)

효과적 과적 Peer ee Review ev ew 수검 준비 노력 력

- 13 -

심사단 방한 일정 및 협의 내용 일정

협의 내용 내

심사단 방한 일정 및 협의 내용 참석대상

일정

협의 내용 내

참석대상

6월 11일(월) 조직과 관리

총리실 및 ODA 주관부처

6월 11일(월) 조직과 관리

총리실 및 ODA 주관부처

6월 12일(화) 개발을 위한 정책일관성(PCD) 원조효과성 개발협력에 대한 전정부적 접근 취약국 지원, 범분야이슈

관련 정부부처 ODA 주관부처 총리실 주관부처, 총리실, 주관부처 관련부처 ODA 주관부처

6월 12일(화) 개발을 위한 정책일관성(PCD) 원조효과성 개발협력에 대한 전정부적 접근 취약국 지원, 범분야이슈

관련 정부부처 ODA 주관부처 총리실 주관부처, 총리실, 주관부처 관련부처 ODA 주관부처

6월 13일(수) ODA 감사 인도적 지원 정치적 리더십 NGO 협력 (인도적 지원 분야)

감사원 외교부 총리실, 외교부, 기재부 인도적 지원 관련 NGOs

6월 13일(수) ODA 감사 인도적 지원 정치적 리더십 NGO 협력 (인도적 지원 분야)

감사원 외교부 총리실, 외교부, 기재부 인도적 지원 관련 NGOs

6월 14일(목) ( ) 국회의 역할 다자원조, 평가, 모니터링, 홍보 NGO 및 시민사회 관련 정책 NGO 시민사회, NGO, 시민사회 연구기관, 연구기관 학계 ODA 시행기관 직원조합

관련 국회의원 총리실 및 ODA 주관부처 총리실 및 외교부

KOICA 및 EDCF 노조

6월 15일(금) Wrap up

총리실 및 ODA 주관부처

6월 15일(금) Wrap up

총리실 및 ODA 주관부처

NGO 시민사회, NGOs, 시민사회 연구기관, 연구기관 학계

한국 Peer Review의 주안점

- 14 -

NGO 시민사회, NGOs, 시민사회 연구기관, 연구기관 학계

KOICA 및 EDCF 노조

한국 Peer Review의 주안점

- 14 -

Special Peer Review 결과(2008)-주요 권고 사항 `ODA 총괄 법적 기반 및 조직 구축·관리

국민인식 제고 전략 수립 및 이행, 이행 시민사회와의 대화 확대

원조규모 확대 및 목표 이행 (2015년까지 GNI 대비 0.25%)

최빈 지원관련 DAC 규범 범 준수 (유상원조의 유상원 의 최소양허율 최 양허율 조건) 건 최빈국

유·무상 통합 중점협력국 지정 및 통합 전략 수립

원조 비구속화 확대 추진

ODA 전문인력 강화

평가 및 모니터링 체제 강화

2008년 Special Peer Review는 DAC 가입 준비를 위한 사전 검토

당시의 권고 사항은 대부분 2010년 선진화 방안에 따라 추진 중

한국 개발협력 추진 체제 정비 국제개발협력기본법(’10)

한국 개발협력 추진 체제 정비 위원회 활성화

국제개발협력기본법(’10)

OECD DAC 가입확정(’09.11) 국제개발협력위원회 (위원장 국무총리)

통합 평가시스템 구축

(‘09.11)

기본법 제정(’10.1)

국무총리실

(‘09.11)

기본법 제정(’10.1)

국무총리실

ODA 선진화방안 수립(’10.7) (’10 7) 외교통상부 (무상원조)

기획재정부 (유상원조)

5년(’11-’15) 장기계획

ODA 선진화방안 수립(’10.7) (’10 7) 외교통상부 (무상원조)

기획재정부 (유상원조)

수립(’10.12) KOICA

수출입은행(EDCF)

통합 홍보계획 수립(’11.3)

EDCF법(’87)

- 15 -

시스템 구축(’11.12)

5년(’11-’15) 장기계획 수립(’10.12)

KOICA

수출입은행(EDCF)

통합 ODA 모니터링

KOICA법(’91)

위원회 활성화

통합 홍보계획 수립(’11.3) 통합 ODA 모니터링

KOICA법(’91)

EDCF법(’87)

- 15 -

시스템 구축(’11.12)

한국 개발협력의 선진화 방안 추진 추진목표 • • 0.25

통합 CPS 추진 및 통합평가

0.15 O D A / GN I (%)

• 2009

2011

2013

국제활동 참여 강화 - 글로벌 개발 파트너십 강화

2015

• 비구속성 비율 35.7%(’10)

•

• ODA 규모 (GNI 대비) 0.12%(’10)

• 0.25

원조시스템 효과적 개편 - 26개 중점협력 대상국에 대한

0.2

통합 CPS 추진 및 통합평가

0.15 O D A / GN I (%)

•

0.05 0

개발협력 콘텐 콘텐츠 개발 - 한국형 ODA 모델 수립 추진

0.25%(’15)

0.1

0.05

3대 전략

원조시스템 효과적 개편 - 26개 중점협력 대상국에 대한

0.2

개발협력 콘텐 콘텐츠 개발 - 한국형 ODA 모델 수립 추진

0.25%(’15)

0.1

추진목표

3대 전략

• ODA 규모 (GNI 대비) 0.12%(’10)

한국 개발협력의 선진화 방안 추진

2009

2011

2013

국제활동 참여 강화 - 글로벌 개발 파트너십 강화

2015

• 비구속성 비율 75%(’15)

35.7%(’10)

75%(’15)

국제개발협력의 기반확대 • 지역별 비중

• •

아시아 55% 아프리카 20% 중남미 10% 중동 C IS 10% 오세아니아 5%

•

국민적 공감대 확보 (통합홍보) 국민과 함께하는 개발협력 (NGO와의 협력 강화) ODA 전문인력 양성

개발협력에 대한 국민들의 인식 제고 노력 www.odakorea.go.kr

국제개발협력의 기반확대 • 지역별 비중

• •

아시아 55% 아프리카 20% 중남미 10% 중동 C IS 10% 오세아니아 5%

•

국민적 공감대 확보 (통합홍보) 국민과 함께하는 개발협력 (NGO와의 협력 강화) ODA 전문인력 양성

개발협력에 대한 국민들의 인식 제고 노력 www.odakorea.go.kr

ODA 광장

주요 정책자료 공유

(ODA 선진화방안, 개발협력위 안건 및 결과,

ODA 평가결과 등)

초 중 교과서, 초, 교과서 국제개발협력 의의 설명 개발교육 아카데미 설립

부산 HLF-4 HLF 4 개최

시민사회와 파트너십 강화 추진 - 16 -

초 중 교과서, 초, 교과서 국제개발협력 의의 설명 개발교육 아카데미 설립

부산 HLF-4 HLF 4 개최

시민사회와 파트너십 강화 추진 - 16 -

Peer Review 메모랜덤 주요내용

메모랜덤 주요 내용 Ⅰ

Peer Review 메모랜덤 주요내용

메모랜덤 주요 내용 Ⅰ

전략적 방향

1. 한국 국제개발협력의 역사와 변화

- 수원국에서 공여국으로의 전환 - 2008년 이후 주요 개선사항

2. 한국 국제개발협력 추진체계

- 국제개발협력 기본법 제정, 국제개발협력 선진화방안, 국제개발협력 기본계획 수립 등

3 한국 국제개발협력의 비전 및 전략 3.

- 한국 국제개발협력의 비전 (국제개발협력기본법 상 기본정신) - 한국 국제개발협력 전략 (한국개발경험 공유, 원조시스템 개편, 글로벌 파트너십 강화, 국제개발협력 기반확대)

Ⅱ

원조를 넘어선 개발

1. 원조를 넘어선 개발을 위한 한국발전경험의 의의

2. 개발을 위한 정책일관성 확보 노력 (예: 최빈개도국 특혜관세, 고용허가제)

3 향후 개선방향 및 도전과제 3.

- 17 -

메모랜덤 주요 내용

Ⅲ

메모랜덤 주요 내용

Ⅲ

원조규모, 채널 및 배정

1. 연도별, 원조형태별 규모 및 추세

- ODA 확대계획(2015년까지 GNI 대비 0.25%)) ( - 양자·다자비율(70:30), 유상·무상비율(40:60)

2. 지역별, 소득수준별, 분야별 지원현황 및 전략

- 아시아 중점기조, 최빈국 최 지원 원 관련 DAC 규범 준수(EDCF ( 최소양허율 90% 이상), ) 유·무상 통합국가협력전략(CPS) 수립, 범분야(cross-cutting issue) 주류화 등)

3. 예산 및 재원확 재원확보,, 예측가능성

- ODA 예산규모 확대 및 예측가능성 제고(CPS 수립시 중장기 개발협력 계획 작성)

4. 시민사회 지원 및 협력 (개발협력 NGO 지원, 민간 CSR 협력 등)

5. 취약국 지원현황 및 전략

6 다자원조 현황 및 전략 6.

메모랜덤 주요 내용

Ⅳ

조직과 관리

1. 국제개발협력 관련 부처(기관)별 역할, 조정시스템 - 총리실, 기재부, 외교부, KOICA, EDCF, 여타부처(지자체 포함)의 참여 - 국제개발협력 위원회를 통한 조정기능 강화

조직과 관리

2. 성과중심적인 원조 관리 시스템

- 국제개발협력 통합평가체제 수립(국제개발협력위원회 평가소위원회 운영) - ODA 통합모니터링 시스템 구축

3 본부 3. 본부-현장간 현장간 협력 협력·조정 조정 시스템

- 현지 ODA 협의체 운영 (공관, KOICA, EDCF, 수원국 관계자 등 참여) - 원조시행기관의 현장화 기반 확대

4. 인적자원 개발

- KOICA, EDCF 조직체제 개편 및 인력 확충 - 국제개발협력 전문인력 양 양성 추진

- 18 -

메모랜덤 주요 내용 Ⅴ

원조효과성과 성과

1 원조효과성 제고를 위한 한국의 노력 1. - 부산 세계개발원조 총회 개최

원조효과성과 성과

1 원조효과성 제고를 위한 한국의 노력 1. - 부산 세계개발원조 총회 개최

2 원조효과성 제고 성과 2.

- 원조의 비구속화 추진 (2015년까지 비구속성 비율 75% 확대 계획) - 주인의식, 원조일치(수원국 국가발전계획과의 조화), 원조조화(여타 공여국 등과의 협력)

Ⅵ

인도적 지원

1. 인도적 지원정책 및 이행체계

- 해외긴급구호에 관한 법률 제정 및 시행(2007) - 선진인도지원공여국 협의체(GHD) 가입(2009)

2. 효율적 지원을 위한 노력

- 인도적 지원분야 민관협력 확대 추진 (해외재난관련 민간의 역할 증가) - 국제기구를 통한 지원 강화(UN 수요평가 및 공동기금 활용 확대 등)

한국 Peer Review의 의의

- 19 -

- 인도적 지원분야 민관협력 확대 추진 (해외재난관련 민간의 역할 증가) - 국제기구를 통한 지원 강화(UN 수요평가 및 공동기금 활용 확대 등)

한국 Peer Review의 의의

- 19 -

Peer Review의 의의

2008년 특별동료검토(special peer review) 이후

구체적 성과와 진전사항을 국제사회에 적극 설명

최빈개도국에서 공여국으로 전환한 한국 ODA의 의의와

국제사회에서의 역할을 홍보하는 기회로 활용

한국 ODA 정책 및 제도의 발전에 도움이 되는 도전과제와

실현가능한 권고안 도출

ODA에 대한 우리 국민들의 인식제고 및 지지기반 확대 기회

감사합니다 - 20 -

OECD/DAC Peer Review 절차 ※ 출처 : Information Note on the DAC Peer Review Process

본 문서는 동료평가의 개요와 준비절차에 대한 안내서로서 수검국 평가국 사무국 등 평가관련 모든 당사자들이 활용할 수 있도록 제공

개발원조위원회 는 양자 원조국들이 모여 경혐을 교류하고 공동관심사 등을 해결하기위한 포럼으로 기능

의 기본 목적은 모범관행의 공유 조율과 협업을 지원함으로써 개발협력의 제반 분야에서 회원국의 노력을 지속적으로 개선하는 것

은 평균 년 주기로 각 회원국의 개발협력시스템에 대한 검토 평가를 실시

동 평가를 통해 권고와 제안이 이루어지며 후속절차를 통해 이러한 권고와 제안이 정책 프로그램 관행으로 이행되도록 관리

동료평가의 주요목적은

회원국의 개발협력정책 및 프로그램을 모니터하고 동 정책과 프로그램들이 에서 합의된 목표와 정책 국제적 및 국가적 목표들을 효과적으로 달성하는지 평가

상호학습 절차를 통해 개별사업 또는 총체적 원조성과의 개선을 지원

모범관행 발굴 경험 공유 원조정책 조율을 촉진

회원국 자격을 가지고 있은 국가는 동료평가 수검의무가 있으며 동료평가 평가자 로서 평가 참여 의무 부담 개별 동료평가는 개의

회원국이 평가자로 참여

- 21 -

회원국 자격을 가지고 있은 국가는 동료평가 수검의무가 있으며 동료평가 평가자 로서 평가 참여 의무 부담 개별 동료평가는 개의

회원국이 평가자로 참여

- 21 -

사무국은 평가연도가 도래하기 전에 수검대상국 개와 평가국 개를 지정

평가국 선정에 있어 사무국은 수검국과 유사한 규모의 프로그램을 운용하거나 검토 프로그램의 복잡성이 비슷한 수준이거나 또는 동료평가를 통해 교훈을 제공할 수 있는 평가국을 선정

언어와 지역 분포 는 평가국 선정의 추가적 고려사항으로 작용

동료평가는 여섯 단계로 구성

준비 기획 사실관계 확인 분석 보고서 작성 동료평가 회의 승인 보고서 발간 후속조치

동료평가의 진행을 촉진하고 성공적 평가결과를 도출하기 위해 평가의 기획과 수검 전 단계에 걸쳐 수검국 평가국 사무국은 팀 협동정신하에서 긴밀히 협조하며 각종 정보를 공유 동료평가 절차는

개발협력위원회 동료평가과 에서 수행

각 동료평가시 일상적 기안하는 책임행정관

동료평가 절차는

평가절차를 촉진하고 보고서를 을 배정

동료검토평가과장은 전반적 방침의 시달과 보고서의 품질관리를 담당 평가단은 평가국가별 대표 명 인도적 지원 전문가 명으로 구성

사무국 직원

명

평가자들은 의 대표로 간주되며 동료평가 절차에 기여하고 동료평가로부터 학습 평가자들은 대표 또는 자국 본부 및 현지사무소의 상급직원급으로 구성

- 22 -

동료평가의 진행을 촉진하고 성공적 평가결과를 도출하기 위해 평가의 기획과 수검 전 단계에 걸쳐 수검국 평가국 사무국은 팀 협동정신하에서 긴밀히 협조하며 각종 정보를 공유 개발협력위원회 동료평가과 에서 수행

각 동료평가시 일상적 기안하는 책임행정관

평가절차를 촉진하고 보고서를 을 배정

동료검토평가과장은 전반적 방침의 시달과 보고서의 품질관리를 담당 평가단은 평가국가별 대표 명 인도적 지원 전문가 명으로 구성

사무국 직원

명

- 22 -

평가자가 되기 위해서는 개발협력 분야에 경험을 갖추어야하고 동료평가 절차의 모든 측면에서 적극적으로 참여할 의무

예산효과성 평가단은 최소 규모로 구성

평가의 준비

과 이동편의성 등을 위해

기획

평가의 준비

과 이동편의성 등을 위해

기획

사무국 수검국 평가국이 수검국의 문서 제공계획 및 평가단 일정계획 등을 합의함으로써 평가절차를 시작

평가단 실사출장 출발시기보다 최소 사무국에 메모랜덤

동 메모랜덤은 준수하여 작성

달 이전에 수검국은 최대 페이지 을 제출

동료평가 내용작성 지침

동 메모랜덤은 준수하여 작성

달 이전에 수검국은 최대 페이지 을 제출

동료평가 내용작성 지침

메모랜덤의 제출은 수검국이 이전 평가이후 진행된 제도개선 향후 과제 등 자국의 원조체계에 대한 정보를 제공하는 기회

메모랜덤은 수검국과 평가자간 협의회의 기본자료로 활용되며 의 온라인 정보시스템 에 등록 발간

메모랜덤과 배경문서들은 영어 또는 불어로 사무국에 제출

최근의 정보를 토대로 평가를 시행하기 위해 수검국은 평가개시 개월 전까지 연간 원조 통계보고를 의 통계모니터과 에 제출

사무국은 주요 문서 평가 감사 연구소 언론 등 광범한 채널을 통해 얻은 자료를 참고

또한 수검국이 다자원조중인 주요 다자기구와 수검국의 성과 등에 대하여 인터뷰

수검국은 사무국에 자발적 기여금 형태로 현지점검비용에 상당하는 비용을 부담

- 23 -

비용은 현지 점검출장 횟수 등에 따라 총액으로 추정산출되며 서약과 자금은 총회 개시연도 년 주기 시점 또는 늦어도 평가 당해연도 초에 제공되어야함

회원국이 평가국 수검국의 사전 동의를 조건으로 아닌 공여국 개가 옵서버 자격으로 평가에 참여할 수 있음

옵서버 참가자를 위해

은 옵서버

행동지침 을 마련

사실관계 확인 분석 및 보고서 기술

은 옵서버

행동지침 을 마련

사실관계 확인 분석 및 보고서 기술

방법론 사실관계 확인 분석과 보고서 기술은 모두 원조 프로그램 평가상 이 관심을 가지고 있는 주요한 질문들이 제시된 동료평가 내용작성 지침 에 따름

내용작성 가이드는 매 년마다 개정 의결되며 개 섹션으로 구성

원조전략 정책방향 정책일관성 원조 흐름과 배분 관리 및 조직 원조효과성 인도적 지원

회원국의 인도적 지원 포트폴리오는

과 인도적 원조국 그룹 에서 정한 틀 내에서

인도적 지원 전문가가 수행

회원국의 인도적 지원 포트폴리오는

과 인도적 원조국 그룹 에서 정한 틀 내에서

인도적 지원 전문가가 수행

보고서는 표준화된 통계부록

을 포함

보고서는 표준화된 통계부록

을 포함

협의회

사무국은 다양한 채널로부터 자료를 수집 분석하는 한편 사무국 고위직원을 의장으로 하는 수검국과 평가단간 협의절차가 매우 중요

이러한 협의회는 수검국 본부와 수검국의 원조수원국 현장 수준에서 실시

동 협의회는 동료평가의 사실관계확인을 위한 중추적 절차

수검국 수도 본부 실사 실사단은 수검국 개발협력 추진체계와 관계되는 모든 분야를 실사

- 24 -

통상 일간의 실사일정 수립을 위해 사무국은 수원국 코디네이터와 직접 연락

수검국은 방문을 위한 회의 일정 숙소예약 현지 이동수단 등 제반사항을 담당

협의회 개회와 폐회 세션은 통상 기관장급 이 참석하며 원조 관계 부처 청 및 정부 각부처 감사기관 감사원 국회 민간단체 대표단체 학계 연구기관 등 다양한 협의 수행

폐회세션에서 평가단은 주요발견사항 또는 발표하고 토론과 답변의 기회를 제공

을

필드미션 수검국 본국 방문에 이어 실사단은 수원국 현장에 주의 기간동안 방문하여 원조정책이 어떻게 이행되는지 점검

동 미션은 국가지원프로그램의 적절성과 효과성을 종합적으로 평가하거나 개별 프로젝트에 대한 평가를 목적으로 하지 않음

평가단은 수검국의 개발협력을 대표할 수 있는 포괄적 또는 시스템 관련 사항과 교훈을 검토

실사단은 수원국의 다양한 이해관계자 수원국 정부관료 수혜자 시민사회대표 다른 공여국 등 와 면담

수원국 현지실사 마지막 단계에서 수원청 본부를 방문하여 를 발표

수원국 현지점검 보고서는 동료평가의 별도 부록으로 포함

현지방문계획은 사무국에서 수원국 주재 수검국 대표와 직접 협의하여 수립하며 수검국 대표는 현지 이동 등 모든 편의 제공

보고서 초안작성

사무국은 실사기간 수집 자료 등을 다른 종합정리

평가국들과 협의하여 부록과 동료평가 부

초안을 작성

사무국보고서 초안 은 평가자들의 의견수렴을 거쳐 수검국에 송부되며 수검국은 주간 본문의 사실관계 등을 검토 - 25 -

평가국들과 협의하여 부록과 동료평가 부

초안을 작성

사무국보고서 초안 은 평가자들의 의견수렴을 거쳐 수검국에 송부되며 수검국은 주간 본문의 사실관계 등을 검토 - 25 -

동 보고서는 동료평가회의 개최

주전에

에 등록게시됨

사무국은 평가자들에게 특히 주요 발견사항 및 권고사항 인 에 대한 긴밀한 검토협조를 요청 와 달리 과

은

동 보고서는 동료평가회의 개최

주전에

에 등록게시됨

사무국은 평가자들에게 특히 주요 발견사항 및 권고사항 인 에 대한 긴밀한 검토협조를 요청

에 게시하시 전에 수검국에 제공되지 않음

와 달리

는 동료평가회의 전까지 영어와 불어로 번역됨

과

동료평가회의

은

에 게시하시 전에 수검국에 제공되지 않음

는 동료평가회의 전까지 영어와 불어로 번역됨

동료평가회의

의장주재로 개최되는 본부가 소재한 파리에서 일간의 동료평가회의가 평가절차의 절정

주요 발견사항들은 평가단 이 발표하고 평가단은 의 권고사항 제안을 보고서에 반영

회의참석 대표단에게는 보고서에 대한 의견 제시 및 토론 기회 부여

회의는 평가단이 주도하되 다른 위원들도 상호학습을 위한 질의 커멘트 각자의 경험들을 피력할 수 있음

최종적으로

은 수검국에 대한 권고사항에 동의

승인 발표

은 수검국에 대한 권고사항에 동의

승인 발표

동료평가회의 다음날 오전 사무국은 주요발견사항과 권고사항보고서 편집세션을 개최

의 커멘트 사항을 에 반영하기 위한

동료평가회의 다음날 오전 사무국은 주요발견사항과 권고사항보고서 편집세션을 개최

편집세션은 평가단과 수검국대표 사무국이 참석 과의 일관성 유지를 위해 필요한 경우 사무국보고서 대한 수정도 이루어질 수 있음

의 커멘트 사항을 에 반영하기 위한

편집세션은 평가단과 수검국대표 사무국이 참석 에

과의 일관성 유지를 위해 필요한 경우 사무국보고서 대한 수정도 이루어질 수 있음

에

모든 보고서에 대한 변경은 사실관계 수정 및 동료평가회의에서 합의된 수정사항으로 엄격하게 제한

투명성을 제고하기 위해 표현의 수정 또는 결론 또는 권고사항에 대한 이의사항은 동료평가회의 중 수검국에서 제기해야함

- 26 -

이것은 다른 회원국들 입장에서 정당한 사안에 한하여 논의하기 위함

편집완료된 본문은 최종승인을 위해 대표단에 보내지며 일간의 시한이 지난 후에는 사무국은 어떠한 추가적 수정도 검토할 수 없음

이 단계에서 주요 발견사항과 권고사항 및 보도안내문 이 홈페이지에 게시됨

이후 전체 보고서는 완결된 형태로

와

웹페이지에 게시

와

웹페이지에 게시

동 평가보고서는 의 전자도서관에서 발간하며 수검국의 요청과 비용부담으로 사전출판 로 별도 발간 가능

통상 수검국은 언론 시민사회 다른 이해관계자들에 대한 보고서 발표 계기에 의장 또는 사무총장을 초청

이 경우 수검국 자국내 책임성이 제고되고 개발협력노력에 대한 대중의 인식 제고에 기여

후속조치

의장 또는 사무국의 고위 대표는 동료평가회의 개최로부터 개월 이후 수검국을 방문하여 에서 제안한 권고사항의 이행상황을 점검

방문 전 수검국은 동료평가결과 이행완료내용 이행계획 등 관련 정보를 보고

방문 이후에는 점검결과 보고서가 위원회에 제출됨

년에 시범운영된 중기 검토제도는 현재 동료평가절차의 표준으로 정착

상황이 허락하지 않을 경우 예외적으로 회원국은 중기 검토를 받지 않을 수 있음

- 27 -

- 28 - 28 -

제출

연간 통계보고 제출

메모랜덤

준비회의 참여

통계국 수검국 비공식 조율

평가단계획전반 조율

평가국 개 선정

준비

동료평가 개월 전

수검국

평가단

사무국

의장

역할

제출 연간 통계보고 제출

메모랜덤

준비회의 참여

통계국 수검국 비공식 조율

평가단계획전반 조율

평가국 개 선정

준비

동료평가 개월 전

<참고> 동료평가 일정표

수검국

평가단

사무국

의장

역할

<참고> 동료평가 일정표 개월전

개월전까지 서 내용작성지침 송부

개월전

개월전까지 서 내용작성지침 송부

개월전

개월전까지 서 내용작성지침 송부

개월전

개월전까지 서 내용작성지침 송부

현지이동 지원 및 방 문 협조

사무국과 조율하여 전 체 회의 어젠다 조율

실사 참여 실사단 참여

현지이동 지원 준비

관련 당사자들과 회의 일정 수립 프로그램 사무국에 송부

사무국과 협의 방문 수원국 선정 정부내 부에 통지

현장방문보고서 검토

방문일정 검토

수검국 현장직원과 방 문일정 조율

실사 한과

수원국 실사점검

동료평가

현지이동 지원 준비

관련 당사자들과 회의 일정 수립 프로그램 사무국에 송부

사무국과 협의 방문 수원국 선정 정부내 부에 통지

방문일정 검토

수검국과 방문단 일정 조율

실사 한과

수검국 실사

동료평가

현지이동 지원 및 방 문 협조

사무국과 조율하여 전 체 회의 어젠다 조율

실사 참여

실사단 참여 현장방문보고서 검토

방문일정 검토

수검국 현장직원과 방 문일정 조율

실사 한과

수원국 실사점검

동료평가

방문일정 검토

수검국과 방문단 일정 조율

실사 한과

수검국 실사

동료평가

개월전

등록전 초안 사실관계 확인

보고서에 대한 검토의 견 기여 특히 에 대한 동의 초안에 대한 의견 제시

는 평가회의 주전 완료

은 평가회의 주전 완료

주요내용 초안 작성 주도 등록 번 역요청

보고서 작성

동료평가

등록전 초안 사실관계 확인

보고서에 대한 검토의 견 기여 특히 에 대한 동의 초안에 대한 의견 제시

편집세션 참가

평가단과 에서 제기하는 이슈와 질문 에 답변

을 대표하여 편 집세션 참여

이슈에 대한 토론 주도

편집세션 주재 동료평 가회의 익일 오전

동료평가회의에서 수 원국 현장방문 결과 보고

보도자료 발간

동료평가회의 주재

평가단 사무국과 함께 안건 상정 회의 일전

편집세션

동료평가회의 및

편집세션 참가

평가단과 에서 제기하는 이슈와 질문 에 답변

을 대표하여 편 집세션 참여

이슈에 대한 토론 주도

편집세션 주재 동료평 가회의 익일 오전

은 평가회의 주전 완료 는 평가회의 주전 완료

동료평가회의에서 수 원국 현장방문 결과 보고

보도자료 발간

동료평가회의 주재

평가단 사무국과 함께 안건 상정 회의 일전

편집세션

동료평가회의 및

주요내용 초안 작성 주도 등록 번 역요청

보고서 작성

동료평가

등록

발표회 초청 후속점검 자료준비 의장 점검 일정 협의

인터넷판 보고서 요청 필요시

출판물 주문 필요시

후속조치과정에 의장 보좌

발간물 관리

최종보고서

개월후 수검국 후속점검방문

발표회 참여

발간 및 후속조치

동료평가 이후

발표회 초청 후속점검 자료준비 의장 점검 일정 협의

인터넷판 보고서 요청 필요시

출판물 주문 필요시

후속조치과정에 의장 보좌

발간물 관리

최종보고서

개월후 수검국 후속점검방문

발표회 참여

발간 및 후속조치

동료평가 이후

OECD/DAC Peer Review 메모랜덤 주요내용 요약 1

OECD/DAC Peer Review 메모랜덤 주요내용 요약

전략적 방향

한국의 국제개발협력은 최빈국에서 공여국으로 전환한 역사적 배경에 기반하며 년 가입이후 국제개발협력 기본법 제정 선진화방안 및 기본계획 수립 등 정책문서를 통해 한국 체계를 개선 서울 정상회의시 개발의제 도입 부산 서의 개발협력 개선노력에도 동참

전략적 방향 한국의 국제개발협력은 최빈국에서 공여국으로 전환한 역사적 배경에 기반하며 년 가입이후 국제개발협력 기본법 제정 선진화방안 및 기본계획 수립 등 정책문서를 통해 한국 체계를 개선

개최 등 국제무대에

서울 정상회의시 개발의제 도입 부산 서의 개발협력 개선노력에도 동참

개최 등 국제무대에

국제개발협력 선진화방안은 한국 국제개발협력의 대전략으로 개발 협력 컨텐츠 정리 및 활용 원조시스템의 효과적 개편 국제활동 강화를 제시하고 이와 더불어 국제개발협력의 기반확대를 제시

이에 따라 한국의 개발경험의 문서화 및 활용 유무상 통합 협력국 선정 및 수립 통합평가시스템 도입 등 시스템 강화 개발규범 준수 및 형성에 참여 국제개발협력 기반확대를 위한 체제 정비 및 홍보 강화 교육 및 연구 시민사회 및 국회의 참여 등

중점 국제 홍보 추진

개발을 위한 정책일관성

중점 국제 홍보 추진

개발을 위한 정책일관성

한국의 국제개발협력의 역사를 통해 새로운 개발전략이 필요함은 인식 하고 있으나 짧은 개발협력의 역사로 인해 정책일관성 전담 조직은 부재

최근 연구용역 등을 실시하여 인식제고를 위해 노력 중이며 최빈국 특혜관세 고용허가제 일원화 등 개발을 위한 정책일관성 관련 사례도 있음

원조규모, 채널 및 배정

원조규모 확대 한국은 년까지 증가 목표 대비 국제개발협력선진화 방안 등 정책문서에 명시하고 충실히 달성 중

를

지역별 소득수준별 분야별 배분 한국은 아시아에 대한 중점 지원 기조를 유지하여 양자 의 를 배정하고 아프리카에 대한 지원을 확대하여 양자 의 를 지원할 계획

- 29 -

원조규모, 채널 및 배정 원조규모 확대 한국은 년까지 증가 목표 대비 국제개발협력선진화 방안 등 정책문서에 명시하고 충실히 달성 중

를

- 29 -

소득수준별 최빈국 및 기타저소득국에 대한 지원이 확대되고 있으며 최빈국 지원의 경우 유상원조 지원의 양허성 비율 등 국제규범을 준수 분야별 지원의 경우 사회 및 경제 를 중심으로 지원하고 있으며 특히 국가지원전략 수립시 개의 중점지원 분야를 선정하여 선택과 집중의 노력도 병행 한편 최근 범분야 이슈의 중요성을 감안하여 젠더 환경 인권 등 범분야 이슈의 주류화를 위해서도 노력

시민사회 지원 및 협력 국제개발협력 선진화방안은 시민사회를 실질적 개발협력 파트너로 인정하고 협력을 강화할 것을 제시

개발 의 현장사업 이외 민간기업 과의 연계 및 교육원 설립을 통한 참여 역량 강화 등 지원대상 및 협력 사업의 범위 확대

취약국 지원 국제사회의 평화 구축 노력에 동참하여 이라크 아프간 등 분쟁국가를 중심으로 활동 중

다자원조 규모 확대계획과 연계하여 년 까지 전체 수준을 유지하면서 다자원조의 규모도 확대할 계획

중

달성 보건 기후 식량 등 글로벌이슈에 적극 참여하고 양자 차원의 접근이 힘든 취약국이나 인도적 지원 분야를 중점 지원하여 양자원조와 보완적으로 활용

조직과 관리

중

조직과 관리

전반적 구조 국제개발협력위원회는 총괄 조정기관으로 국제개발협력에 관한 정책들이 종합 체계적으로 추진될 수 있도록 주요사항을 심의하며 기획재정부와 외교통상부는 각각 유상 및 무상협력의 주관기관으로 지정 와 수출입은행은 각각 유상 및 무상협력 사업의 시행을 담당

특히 조정기능 강화를 위해 국제개발협력위원회 사무국 신설 개최횟수 증가 실무위 및 평가소위 운영 등 의 역할을 강화하고 주관기관을 중심으로 유상 및 무상 관계기관 협의회 운영 및 시행 기관간 정례협의를 실시

원조관리 시스템 개선 국제개발협력의 책임있는 이행과 효과성 제고를 위해 통합평가 체제를 도입하였으며 시행기관에서도 평가역량 강화 노력도 추진

통합 모니터링 시스템을 구축을 통해 비효율적인 중복사업 추진을

방지하고 관계기관 간 시너지 효과를 거둘 수 있을 것으로 예상 - 30 -

본부 현장간 협력 조정 협력국 재외공관을 중심으로 현지 협의체 를 운영하고 있으며 시행기관 의 현지 파견인력 비중을 확대 중 인적자원개발 전문인력 양성을 위해 국제개발협력 시행계획에 전문 인력 양성계획을 포함하고 있으며 전문가 컨설턴트 학생 봉사단 등을 중심으로 민간 인력 양성 및 활용 추진

원조 효과성

원조효과성 제고 노력 국제개발협력 선진화방안을 중심으로 원조일치 조화 및 성과관리시스템 도입 등을 지속 추진 중

부산 개발원조총회 개최를 통해 원조효과성에서 개발효과성으로 논의를 확장하였으며 후족조치 추진 차원에서 원조효과성 제고를 위한시스템 개선 및 포용적 개발 파트너십 강화 등을 추진

비구속화 확대 년까지 비구속화 비율을 로 확대한다는 계획하에 현지 및 국제입찰 활용 협조융자 및 프로그램 차관 도입등을 통해 비구속화 원조 비율은 년 수준에서 년 이상으로 확대

역량강화 일치 조화 수원국의 역량강화 및 주인의식 제고를 위해 프로젝트 사업 내 역량강화요소 확대 연수 사업 및 봉사단 파견을 지속 추진

수원국 조달시스템 활용 및 구축역량 지원 수립시 수원국 정부와의 원조정책대화 정례화를 통해 수원국의 개발계획 및 시스템과 일치를 도모하며

주요 원조공여국과 협력체계 마련 및 수원국내 원조공여기관간 회의에 주도적으로 참여하여 원조조화의 노력에 동참

인도적 지원

지원정책 정비 한국의 인도적 지원은 의 핵심결의안 및 선진 인도 지원 공여국 협의체 의 핵심원칙을 존중하여 인도적 지원에 대한 기본정책 수립 월 및 해외긴급구호 선진화 방안 월 을 마련

국제사회와의 조율을 통한 지원 강화 한국은 가입 통해 인도적 지원의 국제규범을 준수하고 수요평가 공동기금 참여 등 국제사회와의 조율을 통한 지원을 강화

- 31 -

월을 및 끝

- 31 -

월을 및 끝

Memorandum for the DAC Peer Review

Republic of KOREA

2012

May 2012

Government of the Republic of Korea

- 33 -

Table of Contents

List of Abbreviations

Executive Summary

Ⅰ. Strategic Orientations

1. History and Progress 1.1. History of Korea’s Development Cooperation 1.2. Major Progress since 2008 2. Legal and Institutional Framework 2.1. Framework Act on International Development Cooperation 2.2. Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation 2.3. Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC) 2.4. Supervising Agencies 2.5. Evaluation of International Development Cooperation 3. Vision and Strategies 3.1. Vision for Korea’s Development Cooperation 3.2. Strategies of Korea’s Development Cooperation

Ⅱ. Development beyond Aid

1. Korea’s Development Experiences for ‘Development beyond Aid’ 2. Enhancing Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) 2.1. Raising Awareness 2.2. Coordinating Mechanism 2.3. The Cases of PCD 3. Tasks and Challenges Ahead

Ⅲ. ODA Volume, Channels and Allocations

1. ODA Volume by Year and by Types of Program 1.1. Increasing ODA Volume 1.2. ODA Channels 2. ODA Allocation 2.1. Allocation by Region 2.2. Allocation by Income Group 2.3. Allocation by Sector 2.4. Cross-Cutting Issues 3. Budgeting and Financing 3.1. Budgeting for Development Cooperation 3.2. Financing for Development Cooperation 3.3. Enhancing Predictability 4. Partnership with Civil Society and Private Sector 5. Fragile and Conflict-Affected States 6. Multilateral Channels 6.1. Multilateral ODA Volume 6.2. Multilateral Aid Architecture 6.3. Multilateral ODA Strategies

- 35 -

Ⅳ. Organizations and Management

1. Overall Institutional Framework 2. Institutional Roles and Responsibilities 2.1. Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) 2.2. Ministry of Strategy and Finance (MOSF) 2.3. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT) 2.4. Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) 2.5. The Export-Import Bank of Korea (Korea Eximbank) 2.6. Other Implementing Agencies 2.7. Inter-ministerial Coordination Mechanisms 3. Effective and Result-based ODA Management System 3.1. Improving Evaluation Capacity 3.2. Statistics Management and Integrated Monitoring System 4. Headquarters/Field Collaboration and Coordinating System 4.1. Decentralization 4.2. Headquarters/Field Coordination 5. Human Resources Development 5.1. Human Resources Development of Aid Agencies 5.2. Supporting Capacity Development of Civil Society

Ⅴ. Aid Effectiveness and Results

1. Enhancing Korea’s Aid Effectiveness 1.1. Overview 1.2. Participating in the Monitoring Survey of the Paris Declaration 1.3. Hosting the Busan HLF-4 2. Efforts to Further Aid Effectiveness 2.1. Untying Aid 2.2. Supporting Ownership and Capacity Development 2.3. Alignment 2.4. Harmonization

Ⅵ. Humanitarian Assistance

1. Framework of Humanitarian Assistance and Implementation 1.1. Legal Framework and Major Policy Decisions 1.2. Implementation 2. Overhauling Overseas Emergency Relief System 2.1. Toward a More Effective and Efficient Response to Overseas Emergencies 2.2. Partnership with Civil Society 2.3. Roles of Military 3. Learning and Accountability Annex 1. Follow-up to the DAC Special Peer Review for Korea 2008 Annex 2. Organization Charts

- 36 -

List of Abbreviations ADB ADF AFD AfDB ARF ASEAN AusAID CAP CERF CIDC CIS CPS CSOs CSR DAC DFQF DRR EACP EAS EBRD EDCF ERF FSO GAVI GHD GIZ GNI GTZ HIPCs HLF IATI IBRD ICT IDA IDB IFC INSARAG JBIC JICA JPO KfW KOICA Korea Eximbank KSP

Asian Development Bank Asian Development Fund Agence Française de Développement African Development Bank Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum Association of Southeast Asian Nations Australian Agency for International Development Consolidated Appeals Process Central Emergency Response Fund Committee for International Development Cooperation Commonwealth of Independent States Country Partnership Strategy Civil Society Organizations Corporate Social Responsibility Development Assistance Committee Duty Free Quota Free Disaster Risk Reduction East Asia Climate Partnership East Asia Summit European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Economic Development Cooperation Fund Emergency Response Fund Fund for Special Operations Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization Good Humanitarian Donorship Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit Gross National Income Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit Highly Indebted Poor Countries High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness International Aid Transparency Initiative International Bank for Reconstruction and Development Information and Communication Technology International Development Association Inter-American Development Bank International Finance Corporation International Search and Rescue Advisory Group Japan Bank for International Cooperation Japan International Cooperation Agency Junior Professional Officer Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau Korea International Cooperation Agency Export-Import Bank of Korea Knowledge Sharing Program

- 37 -

LDCs LMICs MDBs MDGs MICs MIGA MOFAT MOPAN MOPAS MOSF NGOs ODA ODSG OLICs PBA PBIG PCD PMO PPP PRT RBM SAR SOC TSI UMICs UN UNDAC UNDP UNHCR UNICEF UNOCHA USAID WB WFK WFP WTO

Least Developed Countries Low and Middle-Income Countries Multilateral Development Banks Millennium Development Goals Middle Income Countries Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Multilateral Organization Performance Assessment Network Ministry of Public Administration and Security Ministry of Strategy and Finance Non-Governmental Organizations Official Development Assistance Olin Defence Systems Group Other Low Income Countries Program-based Approach Post-Busan Interim Group Policy Coherence for Development Prime Minister’s Office Public-Private Partnership Provincial Reconstruction Team Result-based Management Search and Rescue Social Overhead Capital Transitional Solutions Initiative Upper Middle Income Countries United Nations United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination United Nations Development Program United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs United States Agency for International Development World Bank World Friends Korea World Food Program World Trade Organization

LDCs LMICs MDBs MDGs MICs MIGA MOFAT MOPAN MOPAS MOSF NGOs ODA ODSG OLICs PBA PBIG PCD PMO PPP PRT RBM SAR SOC TSI UMICs UN UNDAC UNDP UNHCR UNICEF UNOCHA USAID WB WFK WFP WTO

- 38 -

Executive Summary

This memorandum has been prepared for the first OECD DAC Peer Review in 2012 by the government of the Republic of Korea. It outlines multiple policy and operational shifts undertaken by the Korean government since the Special Peer Review for its DAC membership in 2008.

Korea has aligned its development cooperation policies and practices with international norms and standards including recommendations of DAC Special Peer Review with aid effectiveness agenda at the core of its efforts. While Korea has utilized its transition from one of LDCs to a donor as an essential asset to its international development cooperation, challenges are recently arising from the rapidly changing landscape of development cooperation. The challenges require more flexible approaches and inclusive partnerships with all stakeholders, national or international. Korea responded to these challenges and recommendations by implementing the following policy and operational changes to make its development cooperation more effective, mutually accountable, and broad-based.

1. Strategic Overview Since 2008, Korea has made significant progress in laying out legal as well as institutional frameworks by enacting the Framework Act on International Development Cooperation and consolidating the Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC) as the prime decision-making body. To create greater synergy between grants and loans, Korea has integrated them under the Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation and the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015. It also introduced the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) and the integrated evaluation and monitoring system for greater effectiveness. For broader-based international development cooperation, it adopted an integrated approach to improve public awareness and enhanced the partnership with civil society and the private sector. Accordingly, the public opinion survey showed increased public awareness on International Development Cooperation. National Assembly also contributes to the advancement of Korea’s international development cooperation with its oversight roles and law-making functions.

2. Development beyond Aid Despite the significance Korea attaches to policy coherence for development (PCD), the idea itself needs to be more widely shared within the Korean government. Therefore, Korea will take a step-by-step approach to align PCD with its ODA and non-ODA policies.

3. ODA Volume, Channels and Allocation In the midst of the global financial crisis, Korea fulfilled its commitment to increase the ODA volume. Korea’s ODA volume reached USD 1,174 million and met its ODA/GNI target ratio of 0.12% in 2010. In order to join the global efforts directed toward achieving the MDGs and resolving global challenges, it has also increased allocation through multilateral channels.

Korea allocates more ODA to low income countries including LDCs, and is increasing grant element of concessional loans to LDCs in accordance with the recommendations of the DAC. For more geographically and thematically focused development cooperation, Korea is concentrating 70% of its bilateral ODA on 26 priority partner countries, while thematically focusing on social and economic infrastructure development such as education, health, and transportation. The government is making efforts to mainstream gender, environment, human rights and democracy in its programming as cross-cutting issues. Korea also provides humanitarian assistance to conflict-stricken as well as disaster-affected countries and is strengthening its assistance for peace-building efforts in post-conflict countries. For broader-based and accountable ODA management, Korea is consolidating its partnership with civil society as well as the private sector.

- 39 -

4. Organization and Management Korea’s aid architecture includes the CIDC as a coordinating and decision-making body, and the Ministry of Strategy and Finance (MOSF) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT) as supervising ministries for loans and grants respectively with the Export-Import Bank of Korea (Korea Eximbank) and the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) as an executing arm of concerned aid programs. Over time, the CIDC has consolidated its status and function as a prime organization for development cooperation. Korea also introduces various mechanisms to prevent fragmentation and overlapping such as Inter-agency Grants Committee and Inter-agency EDCF Committee to achieve greater synergy and effectiveness.

Korea is implementing the integrated evaluation and monitoring system, and strengthening the evaluation capacity of executing agencies as well as feedback mechanisms. These efforts have resulted in greater accountability and effectiveness. Both KOICA and Korea Eximbank have undertaken organizational reform efforts and are geared toward greater decentralization of authority to the field with local ODA Council at its center. Korea also works to build professional capacity of executing agencies and further promotes civilian capacity through various measures including the International Development Education Academy.

5. Aid Effectiveness and Results Since the 2008 Special Peer Review, Korea has continued to improve aid effectiveness for alignment, harmonization, and result-based management. Korea also demonstrates international leadership in moving development agenda from aid effectiveness to effective development partnership at the Fourth High-level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) at Busan in November 2011. Korea has been progressively increasing the proportion of untied aid to 36% in 2010 for the target of untying aid to 75% by 2015. Korea also carries out projects and training program, and dispatches volunteers and experts in order to support ownership and capacity development of partner countries.

6. Humanitarian Assistance Anchoring in UN’s landmark resolutions and Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD), Korea drafted the Policy Paper on Humanitarian Assistance (2008) and adopted the Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief (2010). As a GHD member since 2009, Korea complies with GHD Principles and Practices and is providing internationally coordinated humanitarian assistance. Korea also overhauled its overseas emergency relief system to provide more effective and efficient response for overseas emergencies.

- 40 -

Ⅰ. Strategic Orientations

1. History and Progress

1.1. History of Korea's Development Cooperation

1. Korea's distinctness in international development cooperation is rooted in its transition from an aid recipient (one of LDCs) to a donor country. Korea benefitted from emergency relief aid after its liberation from colonial rule in 1945, and also during the post-war reconstruction period after the Korean War (1950-1953) when the country received various forms of aid including technology, capital goods and consumption goods. Korea used international assistance as a catalyst for economic and social advancement by strategically focusing on a few sectors based on the principle of ownership and sense of mission for development. Korea successfully eradicated poverty and achieved sustainable economic growth by investing in basic infrastructure, human capital and industrial capacity.

2. Korea started international development cooperation to return the assistance it has received from the international community and to join in efforts to address global issues. In the late 1980s, Korea founded Economic Development Cooperation Fund (EDCF) in 1987 and Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) in 1991, which formed the basic foreign aid architecture, and soon thereafter Korea began to contribute more towards international development cooperation. From the year 2000 and onward, Korea has scaled up its volume of ODA and promoted aid effectiveness, in order to fulfill the internationally agreed development goals including the MDGs, and also to comply with global aid norms and standards such as those of the OECD DAC. Furthermore, based on its own experience of eradicating poverty and transforming from an aid recipient to a donor country within a generation, it strives to share its experience with development partners and act as a bridge between advanced and developing countries. Korea's contribution to international development cooperation is rooted in its ability to understand and have empathy with the developing world, as Korea's experience of colonization, war and poverty is common among developing countries.

3. Upon joining the OECD DAC in 2010, Korea has continuously upgraded its ODA system by enacting the Framework Act on International Development Cooperation (Framework Act), and devising the Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation (Strategic Plan) as well as the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015. Furthermore, Korea has been playing a prominent role in global development by successfully leading the Development Agenda at the G20 Seoul Summit in November 2010 and successfully negotiating the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation at the HLF-4 in November 2011.

1.2. Major Progress since 2008

4. The Korean government has initiated a number of measures to upgrade its international development cooperation system for greater aid effectiveness. Korea is diligently working to meet the recommendations of the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008 and has made tangible progress including the improvement of its legal and institutional framework for development cooperation (see Box 1, and refer to AnnexⅠ for more details).

- 41 -

< Box 1. Major Progress since 2008 >

1. Establishing Legal Framework ☑ Enacted the Framework Act and the Presidential Decree on International Development Cooperation

2. Laying Institutional Foundation ☑ Strengthened the function of the Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC) ☑ Created the ODA Policy Bureau under the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) ☑ Appointed MOSF and MOFAT as supervising agencies of loans and grants respectively ☑ Launched the Inter-Agency Grants Committee and the Inter-Agency EDCF Committee

3. Producing Policy Coordination and Integrating Strategies ☑ Introduced the Strategic Plan for the International Development Cooperation ☑ Devised the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 and Annual Implementation Plans ☑ Selected priority partner countries by integrating both grants and loans ☑ Formulated Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for priority partner countries ☑ Established integrated evaluation framework ☑ Consolidated all official overseas volunteer groups into World Friends Korea (WFK) ☑ Initiated policy direction to expand multilateral ODA

4. Promoting Public Awareness ☑ Built integrated public relations arrangement and plan ☑ Formed inter-ministerial joint task force for public relations ☑ Created brand identity of Korea’s ODA and unified ODA website ☑ Expanding partnership with civil society

5. Increasing Size, Channel and Allocation of Aid ☑ Fulfilling pledges to increase ODA volume ☑ Managing the air ticket solidarity levy ☑ Increasing the proportion of grants and grant element of concessional loans to LDCs ☑ Increasing support to cross-cutting issues such as gender, environment, and human rights

6. Enhancing Aid Effectiveness ☑ Meeting the target proportion of untied aid ☑ Making progress in the Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey ☑ Contributing to the international discussion on ‘development effectiveness’ by successfully hosting the Busan HLF-4 ☑ Strengthening partnership with other donor countries through ODA Consultation Meetings on a regular basis ☑ Supporting developing countries’ capacity development ☑ Bolstering aid harmonization and coordination by increasing participation in donors' conferences

7. Improving Humanitarian Action ☑ Devised policy paper on Humanitarian Assistance ☑ Implemented the Plan for the Advancement of the Overseas Emergency Relief ☑ Incorporated humanitarian assistance into CPS and other development strategy documents ☑ Amended the Overseas Emergency Relief Act ☑ Joined the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) ☑ Providing a coordinated humanitarian aid through enhanced partnership with multilateral organizations

2. Legal and Institutional Framework

2.1. Framework Act on International Development Cooperation

5. Korea enacted the Framework Act on International Development Cooperation (Framework Act) and the Presidential Decree which came into force in July 2010, and laid the legal basis for a more integrated ODA system. The Framework Act defines basic principles and objectives, role of the Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC), formulation of the Mid-term ODA Policy, roles and functions of agencies supervising international development cooperation, selection of priority partner countries, evaluation, support for civil organization, and public relations for the Korean citizens’ participation. The Presidential Decree stipulates the detailed mandates for the enforcement of the Framework Act.

- 42 -

< Table 1. Major ODA-related laws > Laws (Enacted year) Act on the Measures for the Admission to International Financial Institutions (1963)

Objectives and contents Regulates the membership with the international financial institutions and measures to discharge the responsibilities as a member prescribed in the agreements governing the respective international financial institutions

< Table 1. Major ODA-related laws > Laws (Enacted year) Act on the Measures for the Admission to International Financial Institutions (1963)

Economic Development Cooperation Fund Act (1987)

Regulates the establishment, operation and management of the Economic Development Cooperation Fund

Economic Development Cooperation Fund Act (1987)

Regulates the establishment, operation and management of the Economic Development Cooperation Fund

Korea International Cooperation Agency Act (1991)

Sets out the establishment of KOICA and conditions for carrying out grant aid projects and technical cooperation

Korea International Cooperation Agency Act (1991)

Sets out the establishment of KOICA and conditions for carrying out grant aid projects and technical cooperation

Overseas Emergency Relief Act (2007)

Prescribes the matters necessary for overseas emergency relief, such as dispatch of emergency relief teams, provision of emergency relief supplies, support for interim recovery from disasters, etc

Overseas Emergency Relief Act (2007)

Prescribes the matters necessary for overseas emergency relief, such as dispatch of emergency relief teams, provision of emergency relief supplies, support for interim recovery from disasters, etc

2.2. Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation

6. Taking into account the global discussions on development cooperation and Korea’s current status, the Korean government devised the Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation (Strategic Plan) which sets out its vision and strategies. The Strategic Plan was approved at the 7th session of the CIDC (October 2010). The Framework Act (Article 8) mandated the government to formulate the Mid-term ODA Policy, which sets out policy directions and volume of ODA, and mid-term strategies. The Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 was approved at the 8th session of the CIDC (December 2010). Based on the Mid-term ODA Policy, Annual Implementation Plans are devised and used since 2011.

2.3. Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC)

7. The responsibilities of the Committee for International Development Cooperation (CIDC) are specified in the Framework Act (Article 7). The roles of the CIDC are to deliberate on and moderate major matters to ensure that international development cooperation policies are implemented in a comprehensive and systematic manner. The CIDC is composed of 25 members, including the Prime Minister as the chairperson, ministers of 15 ministries, and heads of KOICA and Korea Eximbank along with seven civilian experts who are appointed by the chairperson. The CIDC discusses (i) the Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plans; (ii) matters concerning evaluation; (iii) matters requiring coordination by the whole-of-government level from among policies related to international development cooperation; and (iv) other matters deemed important and recommended by the chairperson. The CIDC has the ‘Working Committee for the CIDC (chaired by Vice Minister for Government Policy of PMO)’ to consult, in advance, and moderate agenda items referred to by the CIDC, and also handle matters entrusted by the CIDC.

2.4. Supervising Agencies

8. The Framework Act (Article 9) designates that loans, within bilateral development cooperation, shall be supervised by the ‘Minister of Strategy and Finance’, and grant aid by the ‘Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade’. And also, cooperation with the international financial institutions under the Act on the Measures for the Admission to International Financial Institutions, within multilateral development cooperation, shall be supervised by the Minster of Strategy and Finance and cooperation with other organizations by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. These two supervising agencies (i) prepare sectoral drafts to formulate the Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plans; (ii) examine the execution of the Annual Implementation Plans; (iii) promote the Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plans under its jurisdiction; and

- 43 -

(iv) other roles and functions that the CIDC deems necessary to assign, according to the Framework Act (Article 10).

2.5. Evaluation of International Development Cooperation

9. In order to raise public awareness on the achievements of policies for, and enhance transparency in, the implementation of international development cooperation projects, the CIDC sets ‘Guidelines on the Evaluation of International Development Cooperation’ and evaluates related policies and project outcomes, based on the Framework Act (Article 13). And the CIDC also has the ‘Subcommittee for Evaluation (chaired by Deputy Minister for National Agenda of PMO)’ to strengthen the evaluation capacity. Unlike the previous self-evaluation methods conducted separately by each aid executing agency with different standards and assessment tools, Korea introduced an integrated evaluation system in compliance with international standards, and integrated evaluation principles, standards and processes to all of its ODA programs. Under the integrated evaluation system, each executing agency submits its self-evaluation outcomes to the ‘Sub-committee for Evaluation’. Also, this committee evaluates randomly-selected projects to ensure objectivity in its evaluation (see paragraph 81).

3. Vision and Strategies

3.1. Vision for Korea’s Development Cooperation

10. The Framework Act (Article 3) identifies the following five basic principles of the Korea’s International Development Cooperation: (i) reduce poverty in developing nations; (ii) improve the human rights of women and children, and achieve gender equality; (iii) realize sustainable development and humanitarianism; (iv) promote cooperative economic relations with developing partners; and (v) pursue peace and prosperity in the international community. Under these principles, objectives of the Korea’s International Development Cooperation are based on the achievement of the following matters: (i) reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of people in developing nations; (ii) support the development of developing nations and improve the system and conditions for such development; (iii) promote friendly relations and mutual exchanges with developing nations; (iv) contribute toward the resolution of global problems related to international development cooperation; and (v) other matters deemed necessary for realizing the basic principles. Such international development cooperation vision is reflected in government documents about ODA, including the Strategic Plan. The vision is also continuously emphasized in various global development cooperation forums such as the G20 and the HLF-4 (see Box 2).

< Box 2. The Korean President's Remarks at International Conferences >

 With the understanding that narrowing the development gap is closely linked to the framework for strong, sustainable and balanced growth of the global economy, the Korean President suggested the promotion of a sustainable, inclusive and resilient growth in developing countries, and LDCs in particular as the goal of the Seoul Consensus on Development. < Letter of the President as the Chairperson of the G20 Seoul Summit (November 3, 2010) >

 The Korean President shared some views on how to shape the future of international development cooperation as follows: (i) Ownership of Partner Countries; (ii) Inclusive Development Partnership; (iii) Results-oriented Development Cooperation; (iv) Accountable Development Cooperation; and (v) Enhanced Synergy among Global Forums < Keynote Speech in the Busan HLF-4 (November 30, 2011) >

- 44 -

3.2. Strategies of Korea's Development Cooperation1

3.2.1. Sharing Korea's Development Experiences

11. With its own history of successful transformation from one of LDCs into a DAC member, Korea believes it has strong potential to make substantial contributions to international development cooperation. Against this backdrop, Korea is expanding its development cooperation programs that aim to share its development know-how, in response to the growing global interest and demand from developing partners to learn from the Korea’s development experiences.

12. Documentation of Development Experiences: As the Strategic Plan stipulates systematic documentation and utilization of its development experiences, Korea works to turn these intangible experiences into workable recommendations for policy making and institution building for partner countries. Korea strategically selected 100 cases from 8 sectors2 for documentation, which include economic planning, export promotion, and overcoming economic crisis among others. Korea believes that the selected cases will be attractive for partner countries, who share many common features with Korea’s past. It is also making an inventory of programs and technologies that are highly sought after by partner countries for future application.

13. Utilization of Development Experiences: As a way to utilize documented experiences, Korea provides consultation services that meet the demand of developing countries in different development stages. In 2004 Korea launched the Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) and gave policy advice to 34 partner countries on some 300 areas until 2011. This program is centered on sharing Korea's know-how on achieving economic progress in a short period of time. And also in order to use the knowledge and expertise of MDBs in implementing the KSP, Korea concluded MOU with five major MDBs (AfDB, IDB, ADB, EBRD and WB) and plans 24 joint consulting during 2011-2012. Korea also finances consulting assignments and technology transfer over a wide spectrum of sectors, from education, health, and rural development to public administration and industrial planning. Under the umbrella of the World Friends Korea (WFK) volunteer program, 86 advisory experts have been also dispatched to 26 countries on mid-and long-term basis since 2010.

3.2.2. Reforming the ODA System

14. In order to improve aid effectiveness and to better meet the diverse needs of developing partners, the Strategic Plan has introduced major institutional changes in the ODA system that encompass the whole programming cycle of formulation, implementation and evaluation.

15. Devising Integrated Strategies: In order to overcome the shortcomings of previous dual system of development cooperation whereby grants and loans were managed separately, the Strategic Plan introduced the ‘regional policy frameworks and budget allocation principle’, and proposed the ‘selection of priority partner countries, and the formulation of Country Partnership Strategy (CPS)’ that are common for grants and loans.

16. Priority Partner Countries: In order to ensure predictable and systematic aid delivery, ‘Regional Policy Framework and Budget Allocation for 2011-2015’ was defined in the Strategic Plan. The Framework allowed maximization of the value of Korea’s ODA resource base. It will be subject

Through the Strategic Plan, Korea adopted three core strategies – i.e., Documentation and Utilization of Development Experiences, Reforming the ODA system, Strengthening Global Partnership - and the strategic directions for Broadening the Basis for International Development Cooperation. Economy, Health, Human Resources, Administration and ICT, Agriculture and Fishery, Land Development, Industry and Energy, and Environment

- 45 -

for review and adjustment every five years to be better aligned with Korea’s strategic priorities. For 2011-2015, Asia remains as the biggest region for Korea’s assistance, followed by Africa (see paragraph 40). Based on the ‘Regional Policy Framework and Budget Allocation’, Korea also came up with newly integrated list of 263 priority partner countries. The list was approved at the 7th session of the CIDC (October 2010). This is considered to be a notable progress toward more integrated ODA management since the list of priority countries were drawn up separately for grants and loans, in the past. The 26 priority partner countries were selected from countries, which are under the middle-low income groups, based on their level of GNI and attainment of the MDGs, governance, further cooperation potentials, and their alignment with foreign policy priorities. Korea is now concentrating over 70% of its bilateral ODA in these countries to achieve greater impact.

17. Country Partnership Strategy (CPS): Korea furthers its efforts to devise a CPS for each priority partner country and to use it as the basic guideline for delivering aid at the country level. The PMO devised the Formulation Guidelines for Integrated CPS and designated task force of concerned desk officers from MOSF, MOFAT, KOICA, Korea Eximbank and other ministries for the formulation of CPS in each priority partner country. The guideline specifies the full participation of the concerned stakeholders in the CPS-making process. Policy consultation with partner countries is also required at least twice during the whole phase. In each CPS, two or three core sectors are identified for each country to enhance aid effectiveness, and a mid-term budget plan is incorporated to improve predictability. The CPS will be revised every three to five years for better alignment with the national development plans of the partner country. By the first half of the year 2013, CPS for all 26 countries will be completed.

< Table 2. Comparison between CAS and CPS4 >

CAS Producer Internal Consultation

CPS

Produced separately ․ Grants: MOFAT (KOICA) ․ Loans: MOSF (EDCF) Insufficient processes

inter-agency

Consultation Individual policy consultations with Partners

Contents

Evaluation

CAS

Task Force(TF) under the guidance of the PMO (3 pilot countries); EDCF-KOICA Joint TF (23 countries) Sufficient and in-depth discussions with consultation related ministries, public agencies, research institutes, and civilian experts

Producer Internal Consultation

Insufficient processes

inter-agency

Consultation Individual policy consultations with Partners

Undertake official policy consultation

․Three core sectors selected that are common for grants and loans ․Compliance with global norms and standards ․Detailed implementation strategies and action Core sectors selected separately between plans including budget and office incorporation grants and loans ․Detailed descriptions of expected outcome ․Cross-cutting issues (e.g. gender and environment) incorporated ․Partnership with other donors and NGOs enhanced None

CPS

Produced separately ․ Grants: MOFAT (KOICA) ․ Loans: MOSF (EDCF)

Contents

Evaluation and monitoring method included

Evaluation

Undertake official policy consultation

Evaluation and monitoring method included

18. Improving the Project Implementation System: The Strategic Plan proposed to strengthen participation and cooperation of both domestic and global stakeholders including the government, civil society, and partner countries in the entire process of designing, approving, implementing and evaluating programs and projects. Prior to the programs and projects identification, the Plan

Asia(11), Africa(8), central and south America(4), Middle East and CIS(2), Oceania(1) Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) has been changed to Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) in July 2010.

- 46 -

suggests policy consultations with partner countries as well as dialogues among domestic supervising agencies of grants and loans on a regular basis. It further prescribed enhanced field presence and capacities by assigning increased number of KOICA and EDCF staff of Korea Eximbank to the field as well as strengthened collaboration with other development players such as volunteer groups, NGOs, private sectors and research institutes. Korea overhauled the fragmented and overlapping aid delivery programs of the past to improve synergy and efficacy including the incorporation of the volunteers’ program, strengthening linkages between grants and loans, and between public and private sectors. Inter-agency and inter-ministerial cooperation is also promoted in this spirits.

19. Introducing an Integrated Evaluation System: Measures to reform the previous evaluation approach managed separately by different agencies and integrate them into one evaluation system, Korea adopted ‘Guidelines on the Integrated Evaluation (2009)’ in line with the OECD DAC's ‘Principles for Evaluation of Development Assistance (1991)’ and formed a joint governmentcivilian ‘Sub-committee for Evaluation’ under the CIDC5. With this new evaluation system in place, Korea’s efforts are under way to ensure objectivity of evaluation, institutionalize a feedback mechanism, and enhance accountability through public disclosure of the evaluation findings (see paragraph 81-83).

< Figure 1. Korea's ODA Programming Process >

Procedure

Details

Procedure

Details

Policy Planning

◊ Produce a Mid-term ODA Policy which integrates both grants and loans, and in selecting priority partner countries (CIDC)

Policy Planning

◊ Produce a Mid-term ODA Policy which integrates both grants and loans, and in selecting priority partner countries (CIDC)

↓

Formulating CPS Identifying Projects and Examining

↓

◊ Devise CPS for priority partner countries(CIDC)

Formulating CPS

◊ Devise CPS for priority partner countries(CIDC)

↓

◊ Identify projects and hold policy consultation in consideration of CPS and the national development plan of partner countries (related ministries and agencies)

Identifying Projects and Examining

◊ Examine suggested projects in relation to CPS, technical feasibility, etc. (related ministries and agencies)

↓

Project Planning

↓

◊ Adjust overlapping projects between agencies (CIDC) ◊ Review evaluation indicators before finalizing agencies’ aid plan

Project Planning

◊ Adjust overlapping projects between agencies (CIDC) ◊ Review evaluation indicators before finalizing agencies’ aid plan

↓

Executing

◊ Implement projects according to individual procedures of aid executing ministries (or agencies) and type of cooperation ◊ Aid managing ministries(agencies) consult and cooperate with each other

Executing

◊ Implement projects according to individual procedures of aid executing ministries (or agencies) and type of cooperation ◊ Aid managing ministries(agencies) consult and cooperate with each other

↓

Evaluating

◊ Evaluate policies and projects according to the integrated evaluation guidelines ⇒ Each ministry and agency conducts self-evaluation on its projects, which is complemented by the integrated evaluation of the Sub-committee for Evaluation.

Evaluating

↓

Using Feedback

↓

◊ Find best practices ◊ Reflect evaluation result when planning for the following year

The Sub-committee for Evaluation was established in May 2009 and the ‘Guidelines on the Integrated Evaluation’ was developed in December 2009. Meanwhile, after the Framework Act and the Presidential Decree were enacted in July 2010, the ‘Guidelines on the Evaluation of International Development Cooperation’ and the ‘Rules of Conducting of the Sub-committee for Evaluation’ were revised and enacted in accordance with the FrameworkthAct (Article 13) and the Presidential Decree (Article 12). These Guidelines and Rules were finalized at the 7 CIDC (October 2010). 13

- 47 -

Using Feedback

◊ Find best practices ◊ Reflect evaluation result when planning for the following year

- 47 -

3.2.3. Strengthening Global Partnership

20. As a responsible member of the global community, Korea respects and complies with the international development cooperation standards, hopes to strengthen its global partnership, and plans to increase its contribution to multilateral organizations.

21. Establishing Multilateral ODA Strategy: Korea is scaling up the volume of its multilateral ODA and developing a multilateral ODA strategy. Korea actively joins in global efforts to fulfill the MDGs and addresses cross national issues such as climate change, food security, and humanitarian issues, which complementary to, and has synergy with, bilateral ODA (see paragraph 67-70).

22. Complying with Global Norms and Participating in the Standard-setting Process: While fully aligning with the International Development Goals including MDGs as well as the international norms and standards including OECD DAC recommendations, Korea also actively takes part in the norms and standard-setting platforms such as governing bodies of multilateral institutions, including the UN General Assembly, the OECD DAC, MDBs, and other development organizations.

23. Leading Global Discussion: Complementing the current discussions about development cooperation, in particular about the MDGs and aid effectiveness, Korea has played a leading role in adopting the development agenda at the G20 Seoul Summit (November 2010). The development agenda focuses on measures to resolve any bottlenecks for growth in developing countries based on the understanding that economic growth of developing countries contributes to ensuring more balanced global community. In this context, the ‘Seoul Development Consensus’ and the ‘Multi-year Action Plan’ were adopted at the G20 Seoul Summit. And through related international organizations, Korea has joined in the global efforts to identify and resolve bottlenecks in nine core sectors6 that would help stimulate the growth of developing countries. Korea also hosted the Busan HLF-4 in November 2011 that emphasized a new global partnership that will go beyond aid to ensure development (see Box 3). After the HLF-4, Korea continuously strives to build international development cooperation partnership architectures and enhance efforts to improve the Korea’s ODA system as part of the follow-up measures (see paragraph 96-97).

< Box 3. Major Achievements of the Busan HLF-4 >

 It was significant in itself that the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4), was held in Busan, Korea, where a war-torn country successfully transformed itself into a major economic player by effectively using foreign aid and became a member of the OECD DAC in 2010. In light of Korea’s development experiences, the HLF-4 adopted the outcome document called the ‘Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (Busan Partnership)’.

 The Busan Partnership is evaluated as a ‘true turning point’ that went beyond the traditional donor-based aid architecture to embrace not only advanced countries but also the South-South co-operation partners and the private sector, to make a ‘new and inclusive global partnership for effective development cooperation’. Stakeholders of international development cooperation will reach an agreement by June 2012 on working arrangements and global-level indicators and process framework for monitoring the Busan Partnership.

Infrastructure, private investment and job creation, human resource development, trade, financial inclusion, resilient growth, food security, domestic resource mobilization, knowledge sharing

- 48 -

3.2.4. Broadening the Basis for International Development Cooperation

24. To raise public awareness and support for increasing its ODA volume and enhancing effectiveness of the system, Korea has formed a whole-of-government framework for public relations in accordance with the Framework Act (Article 15).

25. Integrated Approach to Improve Public Awareness: Following a deliberation on the ‘Wholeof-government Strategy for Public Awareness of ODA’ at the 6th session of the CIDC (December 2009), concerned ministries have set up a joint task force on public relations under the leadership of the PMO. The task force is mandated to coordinate, examine, and evaluate public relations activities of respective ODA executing agencies. Since its establishment in 2010, the task force produces and implements the Annual Integrated Plan for ODA Public Relations. As a result, the task force has achieved the followings: (i) ODA-related information has been included in elementary and middle school text books (since 2010); (ii) the integrated brand identity of the Korea’s ODA has been approved at the 10th session of the CIDC (August 2011); and (iii) an integrated Korean ODA website (www.odakorea.go.kr) has been launched in January 2012. Furthermore, the Korean aid agencies are working with major mass media companies for a broader publicity outreach on matters related to ODA, and in particular have contributed toward program that would encourage the participation the Korean youth in development cooperation activities. Korea also takes advantage of various occasions for public relations and outreach for Korea’s ODA. For example, at the Busan HLF-4, Korea opened an exhibition of its history as an aid recipient that has been transformed into a donor country.

26. Conducting National Survey on International Development Cooperation 7 : Korea has undertaken national surveys to measure public understanding on international development cooperation and to examine the magnitude and intensity of public support on Korea's international pledge for the increase in ODA and other related policies. Findings from the surveys would be used as reference data in designing future policy direction. The latest public opinion survey conducted in 2011 showed increased public awareness on international development cooperation including some meaningful results: (i) about 52% of respondents were aware of Korea as one of the donor countries; (ii) about 89% of respondents expressed support for the Korean government providing aid to developing countries; (iii) about 79% agreed on the contribution and impact of international development cooperation. The general understanding and support for international development cooperation improved and became more positive compared to the findings of previous surveys (2005, 2008). The next national poll on international development cooperation is planned for 2012 by the PMO.

< Table 3. Comparison of survey findings by year >

2005 Awareness on Korea’s international development cooperation (very aware, aware) (simply aware : including ‘simply heard about it’) Support for the Korean government’s provision of aid Evaluation on current Korean ODA volume (adequate : not too big and not too small) (too big : needs to be reduced) (too small : needs to be expanded) Contribution and impact of international development cooperation 7

2008

2011

37% 76% 62%

51% 83% -

52% 83% 89%

36% 13% 48% 60%

44% 34% 14% 77%

63% 27% 10% 79%

National Surveys were performed to measure ‘public understanding on international development cooperation’ for drawing the background information of ODA policy agenda, in 2005 (by PMO), 2008 (by MOFAT), 2011 (by Korea Institute of International Economic Policy). The result of the 2011 survey is linked to the website. (refer to; http://www.kiep.go.kr/skin.jsp?bid=pub_main_view&grp=publication&num=185543&page=5&tabValue=2)

Awareness on Korea’s international development cooperation (very aware, aware) (simply aware : including ‘simply heard about it’) Support for the Korean government’s provision of aid Evaluation on current Korean ODA volume (adequate : not too big and not too small) (too big : needs to be reduced) (too small : needs to be expanded) Contribution and impact of international development cooperation 7

2005

2008

2011

37% 76% 62%

51% 83% -

52% 83% 89%

36% 13% 48% 60%

44% 34% 14% 77%

63% 27% 10% 79%

- 49 -

27. Strengthening Public Education and Research: In order to promote public understanding on international development cooperation and to foster the next generation of Korean ODA experts, the ‘International Development Education Academy8’ was founded in KOICA in March 2010. The Academy provides various tailor-made development education programs including courses on ODA program management and regional studies in response to the ever-increasing demand. KOICA has founded the ‘ODA Research Office’, publishes research findings and policy briefs on international development cooperation, and therefore, provides a platform for policy making and institution building by producing policy briefs based on research on international development cooperation. KOICA uploads research findings in the KOICA's ODA Library and its website9, to contribute toward public understanding about ODA.

28. Increasing Partnership with Civil Society: The Korean government recognizes CSOs as crucial partners in its international development cooperation endeavors. It is closely collaborating with CSOs, private enterprises, and academia including universities and research institutes in its ODA programs. Different measures have been undertaken to utilize their expertise. As part of this effort, the Korean government enlisted civilian experts as members of the CIDC, the Working Committee for the CIDC, and the Sub-committee for Evaluation to increase public involvement in major ODA decision-making processes10. The government is currently studying various ways of partnership with civil society, and is seeking to engage private companies' Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives in ODA delivery in order to enable the private sector to become active agents and supporters of international development cooperation (see paragraph 57-60). Korea is also encouraging universities and research institutes to participate in ODA policy making and project development. Diverse research and survey activities are now outsourced to universities and research institutes.

29. Roles of the National Assembly: All ministries and executing agencies of international development cooperation submit reports on plans and priorities, implementation and expenditures as well as evaluation to the National Assembly according to the Framework Act (Article 11 and 13). The Korean National Assembly annually oversees and assesses ODA policies, budget execution of the respective ministries and agencies. The Annual Implementation Plans of the next year and evaluation reports of the previous year are submitted to the National Assembly during the first half of the year. And findings from these reports are reflected in the budgeting process for the following year. In addition, the National Assembly Budget Office (Program Evaluation Bureau) evaluates the performance of ODA programs, and produces policy guidance and recommendations that can be used for future directions of the government's ODA policy11. The National Assembly also provides policy consultations through seminars on ODA. For example, the Framework Act was enacted after undergoing such a procedure.

http://oda.koica.go.kr, A total of 24,373 persons have participated in the education program since it launched. http://lib.koica.go.kr, A total of 107 research projects were performed from 1991 to 2011. 10 The CIDC has seven representatives from civil society, while the Working Committee and the Sub-committee for Evaluation have six and seven civilian representatives respectively. 11 National Assembly Budget Office conducted the ‘Evaluation on ODA’ in November, 2011.

- 50 -

Ⅱ. Development beyond Aid

1. Korea's Development Experiences for ‘Development beyond Aid’

30. Korea’s development experiences demonstrate the need for coherent development strategies in the areas beyond aid such as trade promotion, industrialization, technology transfer, and human resources development. As Korea also was once a recipient of foreign aid, it recognizes developing countries as equal partners in achieving sustainable and balanced growth for the global community. Therefore, Korea has actively contributed to global efforts to identify alternative paradigm for international development cooperation going beyond aid, as well as enhanced aid effectiveness since its ascendance to membership in the OECD DAC in 2010.

2. Enhancing Policy Coherence for Development (PCD)

2.1. Raising Awareness

31. Korea is working hard to carry out PCD within the government by raising inter-ministerial interests and awareness as a first step. The Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 stipulates the need to harmonize and coordinate ODA policy guidelines with other policies such as trade, agriculture, migration, and investment, and further specifies to seek possible policy cooperation and coordination among related agencies for the benefit of development partners. In the Annual Implementation Plan for 2012, the government laid the foundation for PCD related research and policies12. Korea initiated a research project on PCD in the second half of 2011 and as a part of the project, a symposium was held in March 2012. Many participants from the government, aid agencies, academia, and civil society examined the current status and discussed measures to improve policy coherence in Korea's development cooperation by learning from best practices of major DAC member countries.

2.2. Coordinating Mechanism

32. The Framework Act equipped the CIDC with the responsibility of deliberating on, and moderating matters concerning ODA policies at the whole-of-government-level. The CIDC is chaired by the Prime Minister and joined by ministers and heads of government agencies directly supervising and executing ODA, as well as other ministers overseeing issues of trade, labor, and environment among others. In this context, the CIDC has the potential to be expanded into an institutional mechanism to ensure policy coherence in policy making and implementation including information sharing among government ministries and agencies.

2.3. The Cases of PCD

33. Preferential Tariff for LDCs: Korea supports the economic development and export promotion of developing countries by granting the preferential tariff for LDCs. The Duty Free Quota Free (DFQF) treatment for LDCs was significantly expanded in 2008, in line with the international discussions including 2005 WTO Ministerial Meeting in Hong Kong and the policy of the Korean government to expand cooperation with developing countries. By gradually increasing the number of items applied to this rule, the Korean government decided to enlarge their shares up to 95% of

According to the Annual Implementation Plan for 2012, the Korean government will actively share information and results related to PCD and participate actively in discussions related to PCD matters in and out of the country. Also, the Korean government intends to build a platform for establishing an action plan of PCD agenda by promoting researches on relevant areas such as trade and immigration.

- 51 -

total trade items in 201213. As a result, the import amount from LDCs which accounted for 0.6% of the total import amount to Korea in 2007 increased to 0.8% as of 2011.

34. Unifying Employment Permit System: In the past, the Korean government gave permission to foreign workers under only limited conditions when Korean workers were not available. However, the Korean government unified the previously diverse foreign workers employment permit system14 in January 2007 and legalized the employment of unskilled foreign workers from developing countries and institutionalized their legal rights as equal to Korean nationals. As a result, the legal status of unskilled foreign workers in Korea has improved, and it is expected that the remittance by workers from developing countries will increase.

3. Tasks and Challenges Ahead

35. Given that the idea of PCD is not widely shared in the Korean government and requires whole-ofgovernment awareness, the government intends to make a step-by-step approach to align PCD with its ODA as well as non-ODA policies. A research project on the ways to enhance PCD was completed in March 2012. By widely distributing the research findings to other ministries, government institutions, and the general public, the Korean government plans to raise public awareness and support for PCD. In addition, the Korean government will introduce various measures to promote policy coherence in the policy making process by raising awareness of government officials, providing incentives, and documenting policy references.

Expansion of the proportion of items for the preferential tariff to LDCs by year (2007) 1.8% (2008) 75% (2009) 80% (2010) 85% (2011) 90% (2012) 95% Unskilled foreign workforce was introduced to Korea through the ‘Industrial Training System for Foreign Workers (1992)’, and developed into the enactment of the ‘Act on the Employment of Foreign work, etc. (2003)’. Since 2007, Korea has unified the labor permit system.

- 52 -

Ⅲ. ODA Volume, Channels and Allocations

1. ODA Volume by Year and by Types of Program

1.1. Increasing ODA Volume

36. Korea has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to increase its ODA volume. The commitment was echoed by the President at major international conferences including the UN General Assembly, the G20 Seoul Summit, and the Busan HLF-4. The Strategic Plan also projects a steady increase of the ODA/GNI ratio to 0.25% by 2015, by which Korea can come close to the average level of DAC members. Accordingly, a mid-term ODA scale-up plan15 is under implementation. In 2010 Korea met its ODA/GNI target ratio of 0.12%, further fulfilling the target as was specified at the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008. Of note, Korea’s ODA volume has increased in five consecutive years from USD 455 million in 2006 to USD 1,174 million in 2010 (see Figure 2), accomplishing the Korean government’s commitment to the international community in the midst of the global economic crisis. It is tentative but in 2011, Korea’s ODA volume would reach its historical high of USD 1,321 million. This means that Korea is one of only seven DAC member countries whose ODA volume increased in real terms.

< Figure 2. Total ODA Volume and ODA/GNI Ratio >

1.2. ODA Channels

37. The Strategic Plan is stated to maintain the bilateral to multilateral ODA ratio at 70:30 in parallel with the steady increase in the total ODA volume by 2015. During the past five years (2006-2010), bilateral ODA totaled USD 2,888 million (bilateral ODA for 2010 amounted to USD 900.6 million), while multilateral ODA totaled USD 1,056 million (multilateral ODA for 2010 amounted to USD 273.2 million).

38. Grants accounted for approximately 60-70% of Korea's bilateral ODA with slight variations in the past five years (2006-2010). The Strategic Plan announces Korea’s plan to maintain the grants to concessional loans ratio at around 60:40 until 2015.

Target of increasing ODA/GNI ratio (%) : (2010) 0.12

(2012) 0.15

(2015) 0.25

Target of increasing ODA/GNI ratio (%) : (2010) 0.12

- 53 -

(2012) 0.15

(2015) 0.25

< Table 4. Korea’s ODA by Type of Aid >

< Table 4. Korea’s ODA by Type of Aid > (net disbursements, USD million)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total ODA (A+B)

455.3

696.1

802.3

816.0

1,173.8

Bilateral ODA(A)

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

5.3

6.8

16.4

14.8

28.7

162.7

227.0

240.4

331.5

666.7

104.4

1.2

1.6

55.2

10.3

2.4

25.3

31.4

31.5

27.8

38.4

2.5

4.5

4.2

5.3

5.0

179.0

219.2

236.5

201.9

79.2

205.6

263.1

234.9

273.2

UN agencies

42.9

47.7

46.7

55.8

77.4

EU institutes

IDA

82.3

69.7

71.3

0.7

4.5

9.0

53.9

56.6

Global Environment Facility (96%)

1.1

Montreal Protocol

Budget support Bilateral core contributions & Polled programs & Funds Project-type interventions

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total ODA (A+B)

455.3

696.1

802.3

816.0

1,173.8

Bilateral ODA(A)

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

5.3

6.8

16.4

14.8

28.7

162.7

227.0

240.4

331.5

666.7

104.4

1.2

1.6

55.2

10.3

2.4

25.3

31.4

31.5

27.8

38.4

2.5

4.5

4.2

5.3

5.0

179.0

219.2

236.5

201.9

79.2

205.6

263.1

234.9

273.2

UN agencies

42.9

47.7

46.7

55.8

77.4

EU institutes

79.1

IDA

82.3

69.7

71.3

79.1

21.9

31.7

Other World Banks(IBRD, IFC, MIGA)

0.7

4.5

9.0

21.9

31.7

125.9

68.7

66.5

Regional Development Banks

53.9

56.6

125.9

68.7

66.5

1.3

1.6

1.7

Global Environment Facility (96%)

1.1

1.3

1.6

1.7

0.1

Montreal Protocol

0.1

-19.5

13.0

10.1

15.5

16.7

-19.5

13.0

10.1

15.5

16.7

Experts and other technical assistance Scholarships and student costs in donor countries Debt relief Administrative costs not included elsewhere Other in-donor expenditure Others* Multilateral ODA(B)

Other World Banks(IBRD, IFC, MIGA) Regional Development Banks

Other agencies

(net disbursements, USD million)

Budget support Bilateral core contributions & Polled programs & Funds Project-type interventions Experts and other technical assistance Scholarships and student costs in donor countries Debt relief Administrative costs not included elsewhere Other in-donor expenditure Others* Multilateral ODA(B)

Other agencies

* Other: ODA not assigned to the above categories (historical series) ** Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

2. Aid Allocation

2.1. Allocation by Region

39. The Strategic Plan and the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 established strategic orientations and allocation principles for each region in the regional policy frameworks.

40. Regional Policy Frameworks: (i) Asia: Korea has had close ties with Asian countries given its geographic proximity and cultural familiarity16. This has been reflected in its concentration of aid allocation to Asia. For instance, Asia received the largest portion of bilateral ODA (approximately 50%) during 2006-2010, and Korea will increase it to 55% by 2015. (ii) Africa: As part of its commitment to join the global efforts for timely achievement of the MDGs, Korea has increased its allocations for Africa where Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) are disproportionately

In early March 2009, the Korean President announced the ‘New Asia Initiative’, which intends to enhance Korea’s cooperation with neighboring Asian countries, including the plan for increasing its ODA contribution to developing countries in Asia.

- 54 -

concentrated, with an emphasis on poverty alleviation and capacity building17. The African partners, who received about 15% of bilateral ODA in 2006-2010, will see bilateral disbursement increase to 20% by 2015. (ⅲ) Others: For countries in Central and South America, Middle East and CIS18, and Oceania, Korea plans to disburse 10%, 10%, 5% of bilateral ODA, respectively, by 2015 (see Table 5).

< Table 5. Bilateral ODA by Region (2006-2010) >

(net disbursements, USD million)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

Asia, total Far East South and Central Asia Asia, regional Africa, total Sub-Saharan Africa North Africa Africa, regional Middle East Europe America, total North and Central America South America America, regional Oceania Unallocated

155.8 82.9 71.4 1.5 47.8 38.8 9.0 71.8 31.1 25.9 13.5 12.4 1.2 42.5

229.3 158.2 66.2 4.9 70.2 52.6 11.4 6.2 70.7 16.9 54.7 24.8 39.9 3.7 45.1

250.8 177.9 61.0 11.9 104.1 86.3 16.3 1.5 30.5 12.9 68.7 43.3 25.0 0.4 2.2 70.0

292.1 188.5 96.0 7.6 95.0 74.7 13.6 6.7 21.4 46.4 55.8 36.4 18.4 1.1 1.5 68.9

553.0 263.4 283.9 5.7 139.9 117.2 15.2 7.5 34.3 38.7 64.5 30.8 33.6 0.1 5.6 64.7

1,481.0 870.9 578.6 31.5 456.9 369.6 65.5 21.8 228.7 146.0 269.6 148.6 119.4 1.6 14.2 291.1

51.3 30.2 20.0 1.1 15.8 12.8 2.3 0.7 7.9 5.1 9.3 5.1 4.1 0.1 0.5 10.1

Total

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

2,887.5

100.0

(net disbursements, USD million)

Share(%)

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

155.8 82.9 71.4 1.5 47.8 38.8 9.0 71.8 31.1 25.9 13.5 12.4 1.2 42.5

229.3 158.2 66.2 4.9 70.2 52.6 11.4 6.2 70.7 16.9 54.7 24.8 39.9 3.7 45.1

250.8 177.9 61.0 11.9 104.1 86.3 16.3 1.5 30.5 12.9 68.7 43.3 25.0 0.4 2.2 70.0

292.1 188.5 96.0 7.6 95.0 74.7 13.6 6.7 21.4 46.4 55.8 36.4 18.4 1.1 1.5 68.9

553.0 263.4 283.9 5.7 139.9 117.2 15.2 7.5 34.3 38.7 64.5 30.8 33.6 0.1 5.6 64.7

1,481.0 870.9 578.6 31.5 456.9 369.6 65.5 21.8 228.7 146.0 269.6 148.6 119.4 1.6 14.2 291.1

Share(%) 51.3 30.2 20.0 1.1 15.8 12.8 2.3 0.7 7.9 5.1 9.3 5.1 4.1 0.1 0.5 10.1

Total

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

2,887.5

100.0

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

41. Allocation to Priority Partner Countries: Following the recommendations of the 2008 DAC Special Peer Review, Korea integrated the list of 26 priority partner countries common to both grants and loans. It is now concentrating over 70% of bilateral ODA to these countries for greater impact and effectiveness. The Country Partnership Strategy (CPS), a policy guideline for bilateral programming and projects for these partner countries, is currently under construction (see paragraph 16-17).

2.2. Allocation by Income Group

42. Aid allocation to LDCs has been dramatically rising from USD 92.1 million in 2006 to USD 333.4 million in 2010, recording a 3.6 fold increase. As of 2010, 37% of Korea's bilateral ODA was delivered to LDCs. Since the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008, Korea’s ODA volume for LDCs and OLICs has been continuously on the rise from 39.5% in 2008 to 55.7% in 2010 (see Table 6).

At the Second Korea-Africa Forum in November 2009, the Korean government announced its commitment to double its ODA flow to Africa by 2012 compared to 2008. In the Strategic Plan, cooperation with the Middle-east and the CIS region are discussed separately from Asia. However, Korea complies with the OECD standards when submitting ODA statistics to OECD: ‘Middle East’ is categorized as ‘Middle East’ (sub-category of Asia); and ‘CIS’ is partly included in ‘South & Central Asia’ (sub-category of Asia) and partly included in ‘Europe’. 21

- 55 -

< Table 6. Bilateral ODA by Income Group (2006-2010) >

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

LDCs

92.1 (24.5)

121.0 (24.7)

144.2 (26.8)

161.2 (27.7)

333.4 (37.0)

OLICs

36.1 (9.6)

37.2 (7.6)

68.5 (12.7)

76.5 (13.2)

LMICs

193.4 (51.4)

250.9 (51.2)

207.8 (38.5)

UMICs

9.7 (2.6)

21.8 (4.4)

Unallocated

44.7 (11.9)

Total

376.1 (100.0)

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

LDCs

92.1 (24.5)

121.0 (24.7)

144.2 (26.8)

161.2 (27.7)

333.4 (37.0)

168.3 (18.7)

OLICs

36.1 (9.6)

37.2 (7.6)

68.5 (12.7)

76.5 (13.2)

168.3 (18.7)

204.2 (35.1)

280.3 (31.1)

LMICs

193.4 (51.4)

250.9 (51.2)

207.8 (38.5)

204.2 (35.1)

280.3 (31.1)

28.2 (5.2)

38.8 (6.7)

22.4 (2.5)

UMICs

9.7 (2.6)

21.8 (4.4)

28.2 (5.2)

38.8 (6.7)

22.4 (2.5)

59.6 (12.1)

90.5 (16.8)

100.5 (17.3)

96.2 (10.7)

Unallocated

44.7 (11.9)

59.6 (12.1)

90.5 (16.8)

100.5 (17.3)

96.2 (10.7)

490.5 (100.0)

539.2 (100.0)

581.1 (100.0)

900.6 (100.0)

Total

376.1 (100.0)

490.5 (100.0)

539.2 (100.0)

581.1 (100.0)

900.6 (100.0)

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

43. As shown in Table 7, the proportion of grants to LDCs tended to increase (from 40.3% in 2006 to 62.1% in 2010). As stated in the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, Korea will selectively provide concessional loans to LDCs by assessing their development needs for assistance and debt sustainability. In fact, Korea will use concessional loans strategically to assist the self-sustainable efforts of LMICs and OLICs with helping them build infrastructure and laying the foundation for economic growth. In the case of UMICs, Korea will concentrate on sharing its economic development experiences and providing technical cooperation to assist their advancement.

< Table 7. Ratio of Grants and Loans to LDCs (2006-2010) >

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %)

LDCs

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

92.1 (100.0)

121.0 (100.0)

144.2 (100.0)

161.2 (100.0)

333.4 (100.0)

Grants

37.1 (40.3)

64.9 (53.6)

91.5 (63.4)

86.5 (53.7)

207.1 (62.1)

Loans

55.0 (59.7)

56.1 (46.4)

52.7 (36.6)

74.7 (46.3)

126.3 (37.9)

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %)

LDCs

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total

92.1 (100.0)

121.0 (100.0)

144.2 (100.0)

161.2 (100.0)

333.4 (100.0)

Grants

37.1 (40.3)

64.9 (53.6)

91.5 (63.4)

86.5 (53.7)

207.1 (62.1)

Loans

55.0 (59.7)

56.1 (46.4)

52.7 (36.6)

74.7 (46.3)

126.3 (37.9)

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

44. In addition, following the recommendations of the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008, the conditions of delivering concessional loans to LDCs changed in July 2008 to meet the 90% of average grant element for LDCs, complying with the DAC Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid. The grant element of concessional loans for all its recipients also tended to increase (see Table 8).

< Table 8. Tendency to increase Grant element >

< Table 8. Tendency to increase Grant element > (%)

Average grant element for concessional loans Grant element for LDCs

2008

2009

2010

2011

77.9

87.7

88.7

87.9

84.0

86.4

91.0

* Source: EDCF Statistics

(%)

Average grant element for concessional loans Grant element for LDCs

2008

2009

2010

2011

77.9

87.7

88.7

87.9

84.0

86.4

91.0

* Source: EDCF Statistics

- 56 -

2.3. Allocation by Sector

45. In 2008 and 2010, about 85% of total bilateral ODA was targeted to social and economic infrastructures development, with a sectoral focus on education, health, and transportation identified as priorities in partner countries' development strategies (see Table 9).

< Table 9. Bilateral ODA by Sector (2006-2010) >

(commitments, USD million, () refers to %)

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

403.1 (59.7)

410.5 (39.0)

696.0 (47.8)

402.4 (27.7)

905.8 (50.1)

403.1 (59.7)

410.5 (39.0)

696.0 (47.8)

402.4 (27.7)

905.8 (50.1)

135.2

160.2

112.5

139.0

324.4

Education

135.2

160.2

112.5

139.0

324.4

38.6

110.8

238.2

150.1

131.3

Health

38.6

110.8

238.2

150.1

131.3

0.5

1.5

20.1

3.5

5.1

0.5

1.5

20.1

3.5

5.1

80.8

74.5

269.7

70.7

283.2

Water supply & Sanitation

80.8

74.5

269.7

70.7

283.2

141.6

57.2

43.5

25.9

153.7

Government & Civil society

141.6

57.2

43.5

25.9

153.7

6.5

6.4

12.0

13.2

8.2

6.5

6.4

12.0

13.2

8.2

171.0 (25.3)

402.9 (38.2)

544.5 (37.4)

876.6 (60.5)

610.4 (33.7)

171.0 (25.3)

402.9 (38.2)

544.5 (37.4)

876.6 (60.5)

610.4 (33.7)

Transport & Storage

99.5

235.9

268.3

641.2

370.5

Transport & Storage

99.5

235.9

268.3

641.2

370.5

Communications

65.3

88.2

91.3

114.7

49.3

Communications

65.3

88.2

91.3

114.7

49.3

Energy

5.0

74.6

182.0

119.1

184.8

Energy

5.0

74.6

182.0

119.1

184.8

Banking & Financial Services

0.4

3.1

2.0

1.1

2.6

Banking & Financial Services

0.4

3.1

2.0

1.1

2.6

Business & Other Services

Social Infrastructure & services Education Health Population & Reproductive health Water supply & Sanitation Government & Civil society Others Economic Infrastructure & Services

Business & Other Services

0.8

1.0

0.9

0.5

3.1

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing

33.5 (5.0) 11.8

129.0 (12.2) 106.9

77.4 (5.3) 47.7

57.2 (3.9) 37.7

100.4 (5.5) 91.7

Industry, Mining, Construction

17.4

12.4

19.5

17.1

Trade Policies & Regulations

4.1

5.8

9.7

Tourism

0.2

3.9

9.2 (1.4) 0.2 (0.0)

31.8 (3.0) 0.3 (0.0)

24.6 (3.6) 34.0 (5.0) 675.5

Production Sectors

Multi-sector / Cross-Cutting Commodity aid / General Prog. Ass. Action relating to debt Humanitarian aid Unallocated & Unspecified Total

Social Infrastructure & services

Population & Reproductive health

Others Economic Infrastructure & Services

0.8

1.0

0.9

0.5

3.1

Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing

33.5 (5.0) 11.8

129.0 (12.2) 106.9

77.4 (5.3) 47.7

57.2 (3.9) 37.7

100.4 (5.5) 91.7

6.6

Industry, Mining, Construction

17.4

12.4

19.5

17.1

6.6

2.0

1.9

Trade Policies & Regulations

4.1

5.8

9.7

2.0

1.9

0.5

0.4

0.3

Tourism

0.2

3.9

0.5

0.4

0.3

59.0 (4.1) 0.1 (0.0)

117.6 (6.5)

9.2 (1.4) 0.2 (0.0)

31.8 (3.0) 0.3 (0.0)

117.6 (6.5)

14.1 (1.0) 40.8 (2.8)

2.4 (0.1) 20.7 (1.1) 52.3 (2.9)

24.6 (3.6) 34.0 (5.0)

35.5 (3.4) 43.3 (4.1)

24.5 (1.7) 1.6 (0.1) 10.3 (0.7) 55.8 (3.8) 44.8 (3.1)

59.0 (4.1) 0.1 (0.0)

35.5 (3.4) 43.3 (4.1)

24.5 (1.7) 1.6 (0.1) 10.3 (0.7) 55.8 (3.8) 44.8 (3.1)

14.1 (1.0) 40.8 (2.8)

2.4 (0.1) 20.7 (1.1) 52.3 (2.9)

1,053.3

1,455.0

1,450.2

1,809.6

675.5

1,053.3

1,455.0

1,450.2

1,809.6

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

Production Sectors

Multi-sector / Cross-Cutting Commodity aid / General Prog. Ass. Action relating to debt Humanitarian aid Unallocated & Unspecified Total

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

46. Korea has made progress in improving sectoral focus in its development cooperation. According to the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, Korea continuously devotes grant aid to sectors such as education, health, governance, agriculture and fisheries, and industry and energy, in order to help partner countries achieve the MDGs and enhance their own growth potential. As for

- 57 -

concessional loans, Korea plans to focus on building basic infrastructure which is indispensable for economic growth. To meet the recommendations of the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008, Korea also streamlined the sectoral focuses. The current CPS identifies only two to three priority sectors for each partner country in terms of division of labor and greater aid effectiveness.

2.4. Cross-cutting Issues

47. The Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 emphasizes cross-cutting issues such as environment, gender equality, human rights and democracy, and encourages their full consideration in aid planning and implementing process. Korea has also introduced the evaluation criteria related to cross-cutting issues such as environment and gender, to raise the awareness on these issues in aid agencies. Based on the Annual Implementation Plan for 2012, aid executing agencies (KOICA, Korea Eximbank) produce cross-cutting evaluation sample cases19 in an effort to produce wholeof-government guidelines on cross-cutting issues. In particular, through KOICA’s Strategic Plan for Advancement for 2010-2015 (KOICA’s Strategic Plan)20, KOICA identified four cross-cutting issues - i.e., gender equality, environment, ICT21, and human rights - which are closely linked to the development and poverty reduction of partner countries. KOICA strives to mainstream crosscutting issues in its policy making, implementation, and evaluation process by formulating separate guidelines.

48. Gender Equality: KOICA introduced ‘Gender Mainstreaming Guideline’22 in November 2011 in an effort to integrate gender analysis and gender perspectives in CPS. KOICA also incorporated gender responsive budget in its education, health, rural development related projects, as well as launched gender impact assessment and capacity development programs, such as country-specific training program, in order to accelerate efforts to achieve gender equality23. Korea is also taking part in shaping international norms, as manifested in the HLF-4 in Busan, where Korea led the efforts to include gender equality-related article in the outcome document (Article 20) and adopt the Busan Joint Action Plan on Gender Equality and Development.

49. Environment: Korea keeps pace with international efforts to mainstream environment and climate change issues into ODA. The share of development projects with Environment Marker or Rio Marker has notably increased to 13.6% of bilateral ODA in 2010 from 1.7% in 2006. This trend will continue for the time being (see Table 10). Meanwhile, the ‘Environment Guideline’, which KOICA produced in 2008 to make its grants environment-conscious, was upgraded to ‘Environmental Mainstreaming Guideline’24 in April 2012, as part of the efforts to mainstream cross-cutting issues in CPS. Since 2008, Korea established the development cooperation initiative

20 21

KOICA will select model projects and apply the gender equality assessment guidelines in the whole programming process as a sample for gender evaluation. EDCF will conduct research on measures to improve the standards of environment impact assessment and refine the evaluation criteria. http://koica.go.kr/download/20102015koicaplan.pdf In order to tackle the widening digital gap, enhance competitiveness of developing countries in the information society and address poverty, KOICA categorized ICT as an important global issue, and adopted the ICT statistics marker to measure the performance. Development cooperation in the ICT sector, which includes human resources development and building of infrastructures and e-government to encourage efficiency and transparency of host governments, is expected to help achieve the MDGs. http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2012/01/13/5555.pdf& str FileName=KOICA 성 주 류 화 가 이 드 라 인 .pdf KOICA is working hard to mainstream gender-equality, allocating 10-15% of KOICA’s development cooperation budget account. http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2012/04/19/1.pdf&strFileNam e=KOICA%20환경주류화%20가이드라인(1).pdf http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2012/04/19/2.pdf&strFileName= KOICA 환경주류화 가이드라인(2).pdf

20 21

- 58 -

named, the ‘East Asia Climate Partnership (EACP)’ 25 to help developing countries to concurrently address climate change and achieve green growth. In case of EDCF, Korea Eximbank revised its regulation to enhance the concessional level of development projects in this area. For projects related to high-growth potential sectors, including solar energy, wind energy and bio-energy, zero interest rate is applied to LDCs, OLICs and LMICs. And, in 2012, EDCF also substantially strengthened its safeguard policies, which is expected to help minimize or prevent the detrimental impact of development interventions in terms of the environment and society.

< Table 10. Environment and Climate Change related ODA Performance (2006-2010) >

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %) 2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Bilateral ODA

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

Environment or Rio Marker (proportion*)

6.3 (1.7)

55.3 (11.3)

62.5 (11.6)

72.1 (12.4)

122.7 (13.6)

Environment Marker

3.7

32.9

18.9

27.4

27.6

Environment Marker•Rio Marker

1.5

21.0

43.0

44.7

Rio Marker

1.1

1.4

0.6

(net disbursements, USD million, ( ) refers to %) 2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Bilateral ODA

376.1

490.5

539.2

581.1

900.6

Environment or Rio Marker (proportion*)

6.3 (1.7)

55.3 (11.3)

62.5 (11.6)

72.1 (12.4)

122.7 (13.6)

Environment Marker

3.7

32.9

18.9

27.4

27.6

94.9

Environment Marker•Rio Marker

1.5

21.0

43.0

44.7

94.9

0.2

Rio Marker

1.1

1.4

0.6

0.2

* Proportion of bilateral ODA which is related to the OECD's environment marker and Rio marker. ** Source: OECD CRS++ Database

50. Human Rights: Research on the Rights-based Approach initiated in 2012 by KOICA will help produce the guideline that focuses on human rights impact assessment and human rights marker.

3. Budgeting and Financing

3.1. Budgeting for Development Cooperation

51. Following its official pledge to increase the ODA/GNI ratio to 0.25% by 2015, Korea has incorporated its ODA scale-up commitment in policy documents including the Strategic Plan and the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015. Korea is steadily increasing its ODA volume annually as planned26 and its ODA budget for 2012 stands at KRW 1.87 trillion with estimated ODA/GNI ratio of 0.15%. Since the national budget is the major source for Korea's ODA, the government has worked hard to strengthen its public relations in order to obtain public support for the ODA commitment.27

3.2. Financing for Development Cooperation

52. In order to ensure systematic execution of projects and aid predictability, a mid-term budget plan is produced by region and country. According to the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, in case of grant aid, approximately 70% of the budget is directed to priority partner countries while the remaining 30% is managed in a flexible manner, but with primary consideration for fragile and conflict-affected states. In the case of concessional loans, approximately 65% of the budget is disbursed to priority countries, while 20% is allocated to co-financing with MDBs, which is set

26 27

http://eacp.koica.go.kr ODA budget allocation by year in KRW trillion: (2009) 1.04 (2010) 1.36 (2011) 1.65 (2012) 1.87 In the public survey in 2011, 78% of the respondents answered that Korea’s international pledge to increase the size of ODA should be fulfilled or should be enlarged further (see paragraph 26). 25

- 59 -

26 27

- 59 -

aside from the bilateral allocation cap to countries. The remaining 15% is reserved for contingency demands and requests from partner countries.

53. For accountability, the National Assembly reviews necessary documents such as the Annual Implementation Plan for next year, reports from the pre-feasibility studies, and final performance reports of previous year during the deliberation on the next year's budget. In addition, in line with the aim, KOICA has set for itself for becoming a strategy-focused organization, more effective key performance indicators, which will be used in budget allocation, have been put in place, which reflect the major goals of the KOICA’s Strategic Plan and international indicators.

54. As part of innovative financing mechanism for development, the Korean government has been charging KRW 1,000 air ticket solidarity levy to passengers using international airlines, since it was introduced in September 200728. This fund has been donated to UNITAID and GAVI, and to KOICA's bilateral projects and to NGOs programs to counter major pandemic diseases in the SubSaharan LDCs. Multi-year funding to UNITAID, GAVI and NGOs has significantly increased the funding predictability and flexibility.

3.3. Enhancing Predictability

55. In order to ensure predictability in terms of ODA volume and project planning for each country, the CPS includes a mid and long-term assistance program for both grants and concessional loans. This helps development players and stakeholders to carry out development cooperation projects in a more consistent and coherent manner.

56. Each aid agency also has its own procedure of promoting predictability. For example, KOICA shares information with developing partners each year on the aid volume and the number of prospective projects for the next two to three years. On the other hand, EDCF agrees with the size of loans for coming 3-4 years and concludes the EDCF Framework Arrangement (F/A) introduced in 2007 with major priority partner countries. EDCF updates the rolling-plans that cover potential projects under the F/A by annual consultation with partner countries. As of 2011, 12 F/A totaling USD 3.9 billion were signed between the Korean government and the respective government of 12 partner countries.

The ‘Global Poverty Eradication Contribution’ was introduced in September 2007 (legislated by revising the Korea International Cooperation Agency Act). Since this mechanism was limited to five years of operation from 2007 to 2012, the bill for its extension is pending in the National Assembly.

- 60 -

4. Partnership with Civil Society and Private Sector

57. In order to encourage public participation in Korea's international development cooperation, the Korean government funds projects of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the private sector with a budget increase from USD 4.2 million in 2006 to USD 7.9 million in 2010. KOICA supported the NGOs’ projects on the ground and launched global CSR partnership projects that utilize the private sector’s expertise and funding from 2010.

< Box 4. Examples of Partnership with CSOs and Private Sector >

 Partnership with CSOs: Rehabilitation and Social Integration Program for the Disabled Poor in Hanoi, Vietnam (2010-2012), launched with Global Civic Sharing

• The program aims to provide rehabilitation service for the disabled poor in Vietnam and improve their quality of life. Through rehabilitation programs, which are tailored for different learning abilities, the Korean government promoted their integration into society.

• In addition, the early diagnosis of disability helps prevention and provides information to parents on educating the disabled children. KOICA budget was used to meet 65% of the total expenditure. KOICA also joined in identifying, monitoring and evaluating process of the CSO’s project.

 Global CSR Partnership: Solar-Powered Streetlights Installation Project in Angkor Watt, Cambodia (2011-2012)

• The project to install the solar streetlights in Angkor heritage was conducted jointly with Asiana Airlines to reduce car accidents and to contribute to local economy with environment-friendly SOC. As for the division of labor, KOICA provided the budget to purchase solar-powered streetlights and helped in the administrative work to gain approval for the installation, while Asiana Airlines designed, purchased, and installed the streetlights.

58. The Strategic Plan recognizes civil society as equal partners and encourages their participation for broader-based development cooperation. Meanwhile, KOICA produced its own Mid-term CSOs and Private Sector Partnership Strategy for 2011-201529 and increased the budget for CSOs partnership as part of the effort to diversify channels for ODA allocation.

59. In addition to the traditional collaboration approaches in which KOICA funded the local projects carried out by Korean CSOs, the scope and approaches of CSOs’ participation have also been expanded. For example, development players from civil society are diversified to include private companies, research institutes, private organizations, and academia. As a growing number of CSOs are playing more important roles in overseas disaster and emergency reliefs, the Korean government finalized the Implementation Plan for Partnership with Civil Society in Humanitarian Assistance Sector in December 2011 in order to support their emergency relief activities and promote the capacities of rescue teams.

60. KOICA's International Development Education Academy, which was established to raise public awareness on ODA, offers training courses to Korean CSOs on topics such as effective implementation of foreign aid projects. The training programs also try to build capacities of the general public on ODA activities and familiarizing them with developing countries and the actual situation in the fields. In order to ensure transparency of partnerships with CSOs, Korean Embassies (or KOICA Overseas Offices) monitor KOICA funded NGOs projects on the ground and release related information to the public.

http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2012/04/30/1.pdf&strFileName=민관 협력사업 중기전략 요약.pdf

- 61 -

5. Fragile and Conflict-Affected States

61. The Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 defines contribution to global peace and prosperity as a strategic goal for its grant aid by providing humanitarian assistance to conflict-affected and disaster-hit countries and strengthening assistance to peace building efforts. For fragile states, Korea is utilizing the concept defined by the OECD DAC and its unofficial list of fragile states. It has rendered support to these specially targeted partner countries mainly for post-war reconstruction. While Korea is staying firm with its international pledge to support post-war countries (see Table 11), it is gradually increasing its humanitarian assistance to conflict and disaster-affected countries.

< Table 11. Committed period and ODA amount for the reconstruction efforts by country >

Country

Committed Period

Committed Volume (Grants)

Afghanistan (including pledges and PRT assistance)

2009-2011

Iraq

2008-2011

West Bank & Gaza Strip Pakistan

(USD million) Performance (as of the end of 2010)

Country

Committed Period

Committed Volume (Grants)

126

Afghanistan (including pledges and PRT assistance)

2009-2011

126

100

19.2

Iraq

2008-2011

100

19.2

2011-2015

West Bank & Gaza Strip

2011-2015

2009-2012

7.2

Pakistan

2009-2012

7.2

62. To join the international commitment to build peace in conflict-affected countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, Korea is supporting their reconstruction efforts with institution building such as government and health services, and job creation. Especially as part of the efforts to strengthen their governance, Korea is operating Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Afghanistan to implement reconstruction projects and to take part in international efforts to secure peace in Afghanistan.

63. Korea assists fragile states at a whole-of-government level and prepares for a special assistance strategy to ensure aid effectiveness. For example, in an effort to better coordinate, and ensure policy coherence for Afghanistan’s PRT, officials from related government organizations such as MOFAT (leading agency), the Ministry of National Defense, the National Intelligence Service, the National Police Agency and KOICA met once a month to discuss and coordinate various related issues. Built on the outcomes of research on Korea’s ODA for conflict-affected and fragile states30 undertaken by KOICA (completed in 2011), Korea will devise a guideline on assisting fragile states in 2012.

64. Korea is currently engaged in international dialogue related to help war-torn and disaster-affected countries. Korea will continue to join international efforts to support fragile states, by following global recommendations and referring to best practices of other donor countries.

http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2011/04/11/111.pdf&strFileNa me=한국 ODA 의 분쟁 및 취약국 지원방안(영문요약).pdf

- 62 -

6. Multilateral Channels

6.1. Multilateral ODA Volume

65. With the overall expansion of the Korean ODA volume, multilateral ODA is also increasing. As stated in the Strategic Plan, Korea will maintain the bilateral to multilateral ODA ratio at 70:30 and accordingly the volume of its multilateral ODA will be gradually increased in parallel to Korea’s ODA increasing plan. In 2010, multilateral ODA, which was channeled through MDBs and the UN and other multilateral organizations, stood at USD 273.2 million, accounting for 23% of the overall ODA (see Table 12). In the meantime, funding through MDBs accounts for approximately 70% of multilateral ODA every year.

< Table 12. Multilateral ODA (2006-2010) >

(net disbursements, USD million, () refers to %) 2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total amount of ODA

455.3

696.1

802.3

816.0

1,173.8

Multilateral ODA

79.2 (17.4)

205.6 (29.5)

263.1 (32.8)

234.9 (28.8)

273.2 (23.3)

(proportion to the Total ODA)

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

(net disbursements, USD million, () refers to %) 2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Total amount of ODA

455.3

696.1

802.3

816.0

1,173.8

Multilateral ODA

79.2 (17.4)

205.6 (29.5)

263.1 (32.8)

234.9 (28.8)

273.2 (23.3)

(proportion to the Total ODA)

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

6.2. Multilateral Aid Architecture

66. Korea’s multilateral aid to MDBs and the UN and other multilateral organizations are supervised by MOSF and MOFAT, respectively. MOSF administers contributions and subscriptions to MDBs, and their actual payment is made from foreign reserves of the Bank of Korea with the exception of the trust fund, which comes from the government budget. Korea Eximbank is partly entrusted with the management of trust funds to MDBs. On the other hand, MOFAT supervises contribution to the UN funds and programs, agencies, and other multilateral organizations, while part of the payments and disbursements are delegated to some other ministries and offices. Since various government organizations are involved with the UN and other multilateral organizations, Korea tries to improve its coordinated decision making system. The Multilateral Assistance Committee, which is a sub-committee of the Inter-Agency Grants Committee led by MOFAT, is a mechanism for cross-governmental coordination on contributions to the UN system and other multilateral organizations.

6.3. Multilateral ODA Strategies

67. Overall Strategy: Taking into account the recommendations made by the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008 on the need to establish an over-arching strategy for all of its multilateral aid, the Strategic Plan includes a comprehensive multilateral partnership plan, strategic focus, detailing scopes, sectors, and methods of assistance. Through the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, the Korean government devised aid strategy for MDBs (supervised by MOSF) and for the UN and other multilateral organizations (managed by MOFAT). A key remaining challenge, however, is to develop a consolidated and comprehensive strategy covering both MDBs and the UN and other multilateral organizations in a single and integrated policy document.

68. Sectors and Organizations: Korea’s multilateral aid aims to support global efforts to achieve internationally agreed development goals including the MDGs, and address cross national issues such as climate change, food security, and humanitarian issues. By doing so, it complements and promotes synergy with bilateral aid. In the case of MDBs, the Korean government disbursed a

- 63 -

total of USD 742 million (USD 148 million in average every year) during 2006-2010 to the WB, including IBRD, IDA, and IFC, and regional development banks, such as the ADB, ADB’s Asian Development Fund (ADF), IDB, IDB's Fund for Special Operations (FSO), AfDB, and EBRD, with the largest funding directed to the WB group and ADB. During the same period, however, multilateral aid through the UN and other multilateral organizations totaled USD 314 million (USD 63 million in average per year). Although the majority of assistance to the UN and other multilateral organizations is obligatory in-nature, voluntary contributions are gradually increasing, especially to the UN's funds and programs – i.e., UNDP, UNICEF, and WFP.

69. The Korean government will increase its multilateral aid, in line with Korea’s growing global role as reflected in its hosting of the G20 Summit Meeting, and increased contribution to MDBs. In particular, the Korean government will fulfill its promise to MDBs that have already been made, and will increase its contributions to the UN and other multilateral organizations in a steady and gradual manner. To achieve the MDGs by 2015 will be high priority in cooperation with the UN development system and other multilateral organizations.

70. Meanwhile, PMO surveyed Korea’s contribution to trust funds in multilateral organizations in December 2011, as an effort to gain lessons-learned for enhancement of efficiency and effectiveness of multi-bi ODA allocations31. Based on the findings, MOSF and MOFAT are in the process of developing a comprehensive plan, which will include reshuffling the structure of trust funds (volume and role of trust funds), as well as the management system (establishing, operating and evaluating funds, etc.).

71. Monitoring and Evaluation: Korea actively takes part in the annual assemblies of MDBs, executive board meetings of the UN funds and programs, agencies and other multilateral organizations, and unofficial donor group meetings, in order to monitor development performance and organizational effectiveness of multilaterals, and mirror those findings back in Korea’s multilateral cooperation policy and strategy. Since joining the Multilateral Organization Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) in December 2008, Korea has participated in MOPAN’s common approach to assess organizational effectiveness of multilateral structures. Korea believes that this joint effort will help enhance its understanding about structural, organizational and knowledge management system of the multilateral organizations, and utilize the findings in its multilateral aid polices and strategy accordingly.

The survey shows that Korea runs a total of 20 trust funds at international financial institutions, which MOSF finances, and a total of 19 trust funds at other international organizations including the UN, in which nine government agencies including MOFAT finance. In 2010, about KRW 77.7 billion was delivered to international trust funds (29 cases), among them KRW 61.9 billion and KRW 15.8 billion were disbursed to MDBs (13 cases) and other international organizations (16 cases), respectively.

- 64 -

Ⅳ. Organization and Management

1. Overall Institutional Framework

72. Korea’s institutional framework of the international development cooperation consists of a coordinating body, supervising ministries, and executing agencies. The CIDC, as a coordinating body, deliberates and decides the overall ODA policies for greater policy coherence and systematic delivery of aid programs. MOSF and MOFAT, which supervise loans and grants respectively, draft the Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plan that are approved by the CIDC. KOICA and Korea Eximbank implement grants and loans, respectively (see Figure 4).

< Figure 4. Overall Institutional Framework >

Committee for International Development Cooperation

• Chair: Prime Minister • Member: Minister of relevant ministries and civilian experts

Working Committee

• Chair: Vice Minister for Government Policy (PMO) • Member: Chiefs of Bureaus and civilian experts

consultation

Ministry of Strategy and Finance • Supervision of concessional loans and multilateral aid to MDBs

workinglevel consultation

Korea Eximbank (EDCF)

Other Ministries

• Chair: Vice Minister for Government Policy (PMO) • Member: Chiefs of Bureaus and civilian experts

Prime Minister’s Office

• Secretariat for the CIDC

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade workinglevel consultation

• Supervision of grant aid and multilateral aid to the UN and others

• Supervision of concessional loans and multilateral aid to MDBs

KOICA

Korea Eximbank (EDCF)

(Executive Board)

(Fund Management Council)

Working relationship

(Fund Management Council)

consultation

Ministry of Strategy and Finance workinglevel consultation

Other Ministries

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade workinglevel consultation

• Supervision of grant aid and multilateral aid to the UN and others

Working relationship

KOICA (Executive Board)

2. Institutional Roles and Responsibilities for Development Cooperation

2.1. Prime Minister's Office (PMO)

73. The Framework Act (Article 7) appoints the Minister of the PMO as the executive secretary of the CIDC. The Minister of PMO provides necessary support for the performance of the duties of the CIDC and its operation. The 6th CIDC (December 2009) resolved to establish the ODA Policy Bureau in PMO in January 2010, to act as the secretariat of the CIDC. The ODA Policy Bureau supports the CIDC to facilitate coordination and coherence of development cooperation policies. The ODA Policy Bureau is composed of 12 staff who work in three divisions – i.e., Planning & Coordination, International Cooperation, and Development Cooperation Support. They consist of not only PMO’s own staff but also secondments from MOSF, MOFAT, KOICA, and Korea Eximbank, in order to facilitate coordination among Korean ODA stakeholders.

2.2. Ministry of Strategy and Finance (MOSF)

74. Based on the Framework Act (Article 9), MOSF supervises concessional loans in bilateral aid and cooperation with MDBs in multilateral aid. For concessional loans, the Ministry establishes and reviews overall policy direction and annual plan. As the main agency for operating EDCF, it runs a Fund Management Council (chaired by the Minister of MOSF) and entrusts Korea Eximbank

- 65 -

with the fund execution, including the identification, implementation and evaluation of loans. With the establishment of the Inter-Agency EDCF Committee, chaired by the Vice Minister of MOSF, it plays a leading role in sharing information on prospective aid projects and promoting coordination between public and private, loans and grants, as well as ministries and agencies for more effective implementation of concessional loans. Based on Korea's development experiences and know-how, the Ministry also implements the Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) to provide policy consultation to partner countries. Concessional loans and the KSP are managed by the Development Cooperation Division in the International Economic Affairs Bureau with 13 staff, while overall cooperation with international financial institutions is administered by the International Financial Institutions Division in the International Finance Bureau with 10 staff.

2.3. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT)

75. Based on the Framework Act (Article 9), MOFAT supervises bilateral grant aid and multilateral aid to the UN and other multilateral organizations. It oversees and coordinates grant aid by formulating overall grant aid policy direction and annual strategies, regional and country-specific program, while supervising KOICA to execute grant aid programs. MOFAT also acts as an Executive Secretary to the Inter-Agency Grants Committee and its sub-committees. The Committee is chaired by the Vice Minister of MOFAT and brings together all the organizations (ministries, committees and agencies) managing grant aid to ensure effectiveness and coordination by preventing fragmentation and overlapping of policies and programs. As for the international emergency relief and humanitarian assistance, MOFAT acts as a channel of cooperation with other donors and international organizations such as the OECD and the UN. The Bureau of Development Cooperation is composed of a director-general, a deputy-director general, and three divisions – i.e., Development Policy, Development Cooperation, Humanitarian Assistance, with 33 staff in total.

2.4. Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA)

76. Based on the Korea International Cooperation Agency Act (Article 1), KOICA32 was established in 1991 as the government agency responsible for grant aid and technical cooperation to support the socio-economic development of, and cooperative partnerships with, developing partner countries. KOICA manages grant aid with five sectoral focuses of education, health, governance, agriculture and fisheries, and industry and energy. Efforts are made to mainstream four crosscutting issues of environment, gender equality, human rights and ICT in its policies and programs. It operates five program clusters of projects, training programs33, consulting services through WFK volunteers34 and Korean experts, and overseas emergency relief, partnership with CSOs and multilateral assistance. In line with the government's plan, KOICA formulated the KOICA’s Strategic Plan for Advancement for 2010-2015 and undertook major structural reorganizations in February 2011. Those initiatives facilitated a region-based operation of CPS in a more effective manner. The Agency overhauled its internal offices toward strengthening the function of evaluation, research, and education for enhanced partnership with ODA stakeholders and greater effectiveness. Currently KOICA is staffed with 247 people, among whom 165 are stationed in the headquarters (composed of 8 departments (including 1WFK HQ), 1 center, 19 teams and 8 offices), while 82 are deployed to 44 resident missions.

33 34

http://www.koica.go.kr http://training.koica.go.kr http://www.worldfriendskorea.or.kr

33 34

http://www.koica.go.kr http://training.koica.go.kr http://www.worldfriendskorea.or.kr

- 66 -

2.5. The Export-Import Bank of Korea (Korea Eximbank)

77. According to the Economic Development Cooperation Fund Act (Article 1), Korea Eximbank is entrusted with the operation and administration of the EDCF which was founded in 1987 to support the industrial development and economic stability of developing countries. As the stateowned bank for international cooperation and development finance, Korea Eximbank has integrated its expertise in bilateral and multilateral financial cooperation with ODA, thus enabling EDCF to better serve the development needs of partner countries. EDCF supports sustainable development of partner countries by providing concessional loans to establish socio-economic infrastructure necessary to stimulate economic development. Throughout the whole project cycle, EDCF provides technical cooperation in order to facilitate smooth operation of the projects and promote their effectiveness. Furthermore, it actively operates Public-Private Partnership (PPP)type loans and co-financing with MDBs in order to secure financing in response to the recent request from developing partners on large-size infrastructure development projects. EDCF is supported by 84 staff among whom 73 work at the headquarters (2 groups, 4 departments and 12 teams) and 11 are dispatched to 8 resident missions.

< Table 13. Major ODA Organizations >

Organization

Structure

Number of Staff

Organization

Structure

Number of Staff

PMO

ODA Policy Bureau

12 people in 3 divisions

PMO

ODA Policy Bureau

12 people in 3 divisions

MOSF

Development Cooperation Division, International Financial Institutions Division

23 people

MOSF

Development Cooperation Division, International Financial Institutions Division

23 people

MOFAT

Development Cooperation Bureau

33 people in 3 divisions (not counting diplomatic offices)

MOFAT

Development Cooperation Bureau

33 people in 3 divisions (not counting diplomatic offices)

KOICA

1 HQ(8 departments, 1 center, 19 teams, 8 offices); Field: 44 resident missions

247 people (HQ: 165, Field: 82)

KOICA

1 HQ(8 departments, 1 center, 19 teams, 8 offices); Field: 44 resident missions

247 people (HQ: 165, Field: 82)

Korea Eximbank / EDCF

2 Groups(4 departments, 2 offices, 12 teams); Field: 8 resident missions

84 people (HQ: 73, Field: 11)

Korea Eximbank / EDCF

2 Groups(4 departments, 2 offices, 12 teams); Field: 8 resident missions

84 people (HQ: 73, Field: 11)

2.6. Other Implementing Agencies

78. Based on their fields of expertise, other central administrative agencies, local governments, and public institutions also conduct various modalities of international development cooperation, in the form of project aid, training program, and dispatch of volunteers and experts35. The Korean government ministries, as members of the CIDC and executing bodies of ODA program, are eligible to administer international development cooperation. Most government ministries carry out ODA projects based on related laws on overseas exchanges and international cooperation, while some ministries do so based on the MOU they signed with developing countries. Meanwhile, local governments conclude MOU individually with their local counterpart of developing countries and finance their own ODA projects in the form of technical cooperation and invitation-based training (see Box 5). The Framework Act recognizes local governments as ones of implementing agencies (Article 2) and the Presidential Decree allows them to join the CIDC if necessary (Article 3).

With increasing number of government ministries and agencies joining in ODA activities, 20% of total grant aid were administered by 40 organizations in 2010.

- 67 -

< Box 5. Example of the Local Government’s Participation (the Saemaul Undong Project, Gyeongsangbuk-do) >

 The Saemaul Undong (or the New Village Movement) was Korea’s comprehensive rural development program in the 1970s, in which the government took a merit-based approach on rewarding performance of villages, and encouraged self-help efforts, participatory development and cooperation, in order to eradicate poverty, achieve rural development and improve living standards in rural areas. To share this experience, Korean volunteers were dispatched, while foreign trainees from developing countries were invited to Korea to learn the principles of the Saemaul Undong and best practices, and visit exemplary villages which practice the Saemaul Undong.

 The Korean government created a TF in 2011 to conduct research on developing an ‘ODA model of the

Saemaul Undong’. The TF is composed of officials from the central government, including PMO, MOFAT, MOPAS (Ministry of Public Administration and Security), and others, as well as from local governments such as Gyeongsangbuk-do, Korea Saemaul Undong Center and other related organizations.

2.7. Inter-ministerial Coordination Mechanisms

79. The Korean government has taken a number of measures to consolidate the function of the CIDC, as a top coordinating body. This includes more frequent meetings, intensified preliminary screening of agenda by the Working Committee before being tabled at the CIDC and monitoring follow up of its decisions by the CIDC secretariat (the ODA Policy Bureau of PMO)36.

80. With the expansion of ODA activities implemented by other government agencies, MOFAT and MOSF chair the Inter-Agency Grants Committee and the Inter-Agency EDCF Committee respectively, in order to achieve aid effectiveness. Korean embassies in partner countries hold the ODA Council (chaired by the Korean Ambassador) and engage all Korean development players in respective partner countries.37 In addition, the KOICA-EDCF Senior Officers' Meeting is held regularly apart from the working-level meetings between the two organizations to build regional network and strengthen the linkage between grants and concessional loans. As a result, the amount of collaborated projects between KOICA and EDCF more than doubled from USD 50 million in 2009 to USD 199 million in 2011, thereby contributing toward aid effectiveness.

3. Effective and Result-based ODA Management System

3.1. Improving Evaluation Capacity

81. Integrated Evaluation System: Korea established an integrated evaluation mechanism for its international cooperation development. Accordingly, the Guidelines on Integrated Evaluation and its Manual were adopted, and the ‘Sub-committee for Evaluation’ was formed under the CIDC (December 2009). It is divided into two tracks – i.e., Self-evaluation by each aid executing agency and evaluation carried out by the Sub-committee. (i) Self-evaluation is conducted by aid executing agencies, which devise annual integrated evaluation plans including evaluation objectives, subject and process of evaluation, and report the evaluation plans and the selfevaluation results to the Sub-committee for Evaluation before and after conducting its own evaluation. The Committee reviews38 the evaluation results and submits them to the CIDC. The Sub-committee plans a meta-evaluation on self-evaluation in 2012 to improve its self-evaluation

Since its inception in 2006, the CIDC has been convened 12 times until May 2012 (once in 2006 and 2007; twice in 2008, 2009, and 2010; three times in 2011; once in 2012). The CIDC has approved the Strategy Plan, the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 and the Annual Implementation Plans, and other matters related to development cooperation (such as preparing for the HLF-4 and its follow-up). Establishing and managing the Inter-Agency Grants Committee, the Inter-Agency EDCF Committee and the ODA Councils in partner countries are based on the Presidential Decree (Article 15). 18 cases of 6 organizations in 2010 and 21 cases of 4 organizations in 2011 were reviewed.

- 68 -

mechanism. On the other hand, (ii) The Sub-committee also simultaneously conducts its own evaluations of selected projects and programs by policy and strategy, country, and sector in order to strengthen the objectivity of the evaluation39.

82. Strengthen Evaluation Capacities of Aid Agencies and Feedback Mechanism: Aid agencies take into consideration the suggestions and feedbacks from the previous evaluation results when planning, identifying and implementing new and similar aid projects in the following year, while reflecting them in the follow-up measures. Thus, the feedback mechanism has been institutionalized to improve the impact of aid. (i) KOICA formulated the Mid-term Evaluation Strategy for 2011-2013 and reshuffled the organization in February 2011 to give independent and autonomous right to the Evaluation Office and strengthen its evaluation capacities. Since 2008, KOICA has analyzed evaluation results of the previous year and collects opinions from related departments, in order to reflect and use the evaluation results in the follow-up measures. KOICA is strengthening monitoring and performance assessment for result-based management.40 (ii) EDCF evaluation system has been substantially improved in terms of independence, objectivity, and effectiveness. EDCF has enhanced the independence of its evaluation by having an evaluation team that is separate from operational, policy and strategy departments. The team independently determines the design, scope, timing and conduct of evaluations, and directly reports to the management. EDCF is making efforts to strengthen its feedback mechanism by building capacity through streamlining regulations and developing manuals for operation staff while sharing knowledge with other donors with advanced evaluation systems.

< Box 6. Examples of Result-based Management System >

◈ Adopting the Management for Results approach as part of the effort to enhance effectiveness of development cooperation

 KOICA is testing and reviewing the possibility of applying sectoral Results-based Management (RBM) to the organization. • Used logical framework and result framework • Devised a result-based Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) plan for 13 projects in 2010 and 2011. - KOICA will produce a detailed action plan to expand and establish RBM. • Pilot RBM will be made on country policies and strategies • RBM will be expanded to operational levels, such as budget, result-based culture, personnel affairs, manual, regulation, and division of work.

 EDCF produced result-based evaluation indicators using the logical framework through consultation with the recipient countries. The evaluation indicators that are established in the initial stage of project examination are applied in the whole project cycle including the interim, completion and post-evaluation.

◈ Strengthening evaluation for evidence-based assessment

 In order to scientifically measure the social and economic effects of development cooperation projects, aid executing agencies are test-running the ‘Impact Evaluation’ and comparing the outcomes in the beneficiary and the non-beneficiary group. • KOICA: Family Planning Project in Arsi zone, Ethiopia (USD 3.4 million during 2008-2010) • EDCF : Roads-related Project in Sri Lanka(USD 62 million for 3 cases)

The topics of the evaluation carried out by the Sub-committee since 2010: (2010) ODA programs to Cambodia, ‘Saemaul Undong’ program, Programs integrating grants and loans (2011) Policy consulting program, Analysis on Korean ODA system, ODA programs on ICT sector (2012) Meta-evaluation on self-evaluation, ODA programs on Agriculture and Fisheries, WFK program In order to ensure objective evaluation that observes the international standards, KOICA produced the Evaluation Guidelines (refer to; http://www.koica.go.kr/download/eng_evaluation_guide.pdf) and a dictionary on terminologies related to result-based management, using the OECD DAC’s evaluation guidelines.

- 69 -

83. Increasing Participation and Transparency: Under the integrated evaluation architecture, the Guidelines on the Evaluation of International Development Cooperation (Article 10) stipulate the collection of opinions of related officials from partner countries and informing the evaluation results to them as well as to the Korean public (through web sites, press release, etc.) to consolidate participatory evaluation and accountability. Accordingly, aid executing agencies release their evaluation results fully and openly on their websites41. Korea holds knowledge sharing seminars on evaluation and also cooperates with other aid donor agencies in the evaluation activities while conducting joint evaluation with partner countries (see Box 7). KOICA has publicized project evaluation results in its quarterly magazine, ‘International Development Cooperation’ since 2008, while EDCF publishes Joint Portfolio Performance Review report in Vietnam jointly with other donors as the 6 Banks activity since 2009. Meanwhile, the PMO reports the results of the integrated evaluation to the National Assembly and posts them on the ODA website42.

< Box 7. Examples of Joint Evaluation >

 KOICA-GTZ Joint Evaluation (April-December 2009) • Target: Construction Project of the Korea-Lao Vocational Training Center

(disbursed USD 2 million during project period of 2002-2005)

• Method: Documentary surveys, field visits, interviews, follow-up studies, etc • KOICA was in charge of planning and arranging the overall evaluation, while GTZ supported the evaluation process by sending vocational training experts to participate in the joint evaluation, providing GTZ evaluation documents, analyzing the joint evaluation process and results, and participating in the evaluation discussion.

 EDCF-Cambodia Joint Evaluation (May-November 2011) • Target: Construction Project of the Cambodia Vocational Training Center (disbursed USD 28 million during project period of 2002-2005) • Method: Documentary surveys, field visits, interviews, hosting of joint evaluation workshop, etc. • EDCF and Cambodian government created a joint evaluation framework by concluding an Aide Memoire, launched field surveys to collect data, holding of a joint local evaluation workshop in Phnom Penh.

3.2. Statistics Management and Integrated Monitoring System

84. Focal Point for Statistics Management: The CIDC designated Korea Eximbank as the focal point for ODA statistics43 in order to have a more efficient ODA data collection and management system and policy planning. Korea Eximbank built an online ODA Statistics inquiry system in 2006 and launched an upgraded version named, Korean DAC Statistics System44 in 2010 to enhance accessibility for public usage of ODA statistics and information. It continuously improves the statistics management system to interface and adjust items accordingly in an event when the DAC statistics reporting method may change.

85. Integrated Monitoring System: All government ministries and agencies related to international development cooperation are jointly building a common ODA monitoring system45, in order to

44 45

http://www.koica.go.kr/program/evaluation/report/report1/index.htm http://www.edcfkorea.go.kr/edcf/job/esti/paper.jsp http://www.odakorea.go.kr/fileDownLoad.xdo?fileName=2010 년 국제개발협력 평가결 과.pdf&f_id=1332229028265104620650MKX10XAAJJ3SMY2NYP6I&f_path= 공통게시판/201203 Based on the Framework Act (Article 18), Korea Eximbank was designated as the focal point of Korea's ODA statistics to continue the statistics management systems which had already built, namely the ODA Statistics Reporting System (2006) and the International Development Statistics System (2010). http://www.edcfkorea.go.kr/edcf/info/oda/stati.jsp At the 9th session of CIDC (February 2011), Korea Eximbank was designated as the focal point for the ODA

44 45

- 70 -

register on-going projects and monitor the project implementation progress. Under this system, each aid agency will enter project details, plans and implementation performance by different categories such as country, modality, volume, and period. The system, which will facilitate information sharing and mutual review among development players, will be updated every four months or whenever necessary. The system is expected to prevent overlaps of projects among different agencies, while increasing synergy and effectiveness of programs by promoting interministerial linkages as well as systematic monitoring and result management. The database system and input manuals have been completed and are currently undergoing a testing phase, and it is expected to be in full-use in 2012.

4. Headquarters/Field Collaboration and Coordinating System

4.1. Decentralization

86. ODA Council: In order to administer locally-based international development cooperation, the ODA Council chaired by Korean ambassador is set up within Korean embassies in priority partner countries. The ODA Council is composed of government (Embassy) officials, KOICA and EDCF staff, and representatives of locally based Korean CSOs on a need basis. They come together to exchange opinions on strategic orientations of aid and on the list of prospective cooperation projects.

87. Increasing the Field Staff: Aid executing agencies are gradually increasing the number of staff stationed overseas in order to identify field-oriented aid projects first-hand and strengthen their operation mechanism. A total of 82 KOICA staff (33%) are deployed at 44 resident missions as of 2011. According to KOICA's Strategy for Decentralization46, KOICA plans to assign 41% of total KOICA staff to the field by 2015. Meanwhile, a total of 11 EDCF staff (13%) are deployed at 8 resident missions as of 2011. Korea Eximbank plans to send 14% of total EDCF employees to 14 resident missions by 2015 (see Table 14).

< Table 14. Plan for the Expansion of Field Officers >

2007

2011 (Current)

2015 (Plan)

Field Staff

Resident missions

Field Staff

Resident missions

KOICA

42 (20%)

82 (33%)

143 (41%)

EDCF

5 (8%)

11 (13%)

23 (14%)

* ( ) shows % of field staff/total staff

2011 (Current)

2015 (Plan)

Field Staff

Resident missions

Field Staff

Resident missions

KOICA

42 (20%)

82 (33%)

143 (41%)

EDCF

5 (8%)

11 (13%)

23 (14%)

* ( ) shows % of field staff/total staff

4.2. Headquarters/Field Coordination

88. In order to ensure field-oriented international development cooperation, the responsibilities of Korean embassies and overseas offices have been reinforced in the overall aid implementation process from CPS planning stage to project identification, execution and monitoring. (i) Headquarters-Embassies Collaboration: The headquarters of supervising ministries are in charge of devising ODA strategies including CPS, budgeting and allocating resources, monitoring and evaluation. Korean embassies take part in the process of conducting projects, such as finding, promoting, and evaluating projects, in liaison with respective institutions of partner countries, as

monitoring system, for its know-how in operating the ODA statistics system. As KOICA is currently executing the first phase of Decentralization for 2011-2012, the Agency is expanding staff on the ground, translating operation manuals into English, and delegating authority to the field, in order to lay the foundation for localizing aid. (refer to; http://koica.go.kr/download/koicadecentralization.pdf)

- 71 -

stipulated in the Framework Act (Article 19). Korean embassies in priority partner countries chair the ODA Council and play a central role in the field-oriented approach. (ii) HeadquartersOverseas Offices Collaborations: The headquarters of executing agencies devise strategies and guidelines for program management, finalize budget allocation plan by country, review and approve country assistance plan, and audit and devise the evaluation plan. The overseas offices, on the other hand, draft assistance plan for partner countries, identify prospective projects, procure, execute and monitor projects, while participating in donors' group meetings in respective partner countries. Meanwhile, KOICA has taken active measures to delegate authorities to overseas offices and to enhance their role in the field, and pursues more clearly specified division of labor between Headquarters and overseas offices in line with its decentralization plan.

5. Human Resources Development

5.1. Human Resources Development of Aid Agencies

89. With the steadily increasing volume of ODA, KOICA and EDCF, as the major aid executing agencies, are making endeavors to reform the organizational structures and develop human resources. Given the importance of human resources development, measures to build up the professional capacities of their personnel are incorporated in the Annual Implementation Plan.

90. KOICA overhauled its structure and aid implementing system from theme-based to region-based operation for executing CPS. Accordingly, it established special divisions in charge of sectoral focuses and development issues to complement the new region-based system. Furthermore, KOICA plans to upgrade its professional capacity by recruiting mid-career level experts as a part of its human resources plan. It plans to recruit more than 100 staff by 2013, and also actively outsource in order to utilize expertise outside the organization. According to the Mid-term Staff Training Strategy for 2012-2016, KOICA has developed many capacity building programs for its staff including the training programs tailored to staffâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rank, work content, and responsibility. For staff members, who are waiting for overseas assignment, KOICA offers pre-deployment education for successful performance of their field mission. As for the coordinators of the WFK volunteers, KOICA conducts pre-departure training to better prepare them for their assignments.

91. Korea Eximbank develops the Integrated Mid-term Training Plan for 2010-2015 each year, which applies to the EDCF staff. EDCF is in the process of reforming its organization to strengthen the functions of policy research and planning (including PR), ensure independence and professionalism of evaluation, and improve sectoral expertise. By 2015, Korea Eximbank plans to recruit some 70 staff, while at the same time consistently recruiting experts in highly demanded EDCF sectors including environment, transportation, and IT, and doctorate-level researchers on development cooperation. EDCF hosts an open forum where prominent development experts are invited for an informal roundtable discussion with EDCF staff in order to help develop the capacities of the staff. EDCF is expanding training opportunities at the master's and doctorate levels in and out of the country, by signing MOUs with renowned graduate programs and dispatching them to multilateral organizations.47

5.2. Supporting Capacity Development of Civil Society

92. With Korea's plan to increase and improve its international development cooperation, Korea is in the process of creating and systematically managing a pool of human resources48 composed of country-specific experts, consultants, students, overseas volunteers and others. The rapid rise of

For example, staff was dispatched to international organizations such as MDBs (WB, ADB, AfDB, IDB) and OECD. http://eps.koica.go.kr

- 72 -

ODA volume has led to a dramatic rise in demand for professionals, and Korea is developing human resources and consultants in development studies and feasibility surveys, in sharing development experiences, and implementing and evaluating projects. Furthermore, in order to educate new experts in international development cooperation, the Korean government is supporting curriculum development at graduate schools for international studies, while expanding internship opportunities and the number of JPOs at development cooperation related multilateral organizations. Korea is encouraging the participations of retired Korean experts, who played a pivotal role in the process of Korea's economic development, to join in ODA activities and contribute as policy advisers.

93. KOICAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s International Development Education Academy, which has been established for training ODA professionals, is offering various training courses in areas such as emergency relief, health, education, and evaluation. The Academy will collaborate with other donor agencies and expand training and education programs, enhance its curriculum based on research on lessons learned from previous cooperation with developing countries, and introduce a certification system of ODA professionals. In order to ensure education that is closely linked to the demands of project fields in developing countries, the Academy plans to take advantage of the expertise of returned WFK volunteers, and promote ODA youth internships.

- 73 -

Ⅴ. Aid Effectiveness and Results

1. Enhancing Korea’s Aid Effectiveness

1.1. Overview

94. Korea has taken various measures to upgrade its ODA systems to achieve greater aid effectiveness based on the Strategic Plan. To comply with the ‘Principles of the Paris Declaration’ and the ‘Accra Agenda for Action’, Korea is making persistent efforts for alignment, harmonization, and result-based management (see paragraph 98-104). In order to raise awareness on aid effectiveness, Korea carried out research, held seminars, opened the International Development Education Academy and provided training to public officials from related ministries. While fully respecting the Principles of the Paris Declaration, Korea will also combine its efforts of operationalizing the newly adopted indicators in the post HLF-4 regime.

1.2. Participating in the Monitoring Survey of the Paris Declaration

95. In order to actively join in global efforts to enhance aid effectiveness, Korea participated in the Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey for the third time in 2011, following the previous surveys conducted in 2006 and 2008. Although 2010 performance fell behind the target, it showed improvement compared to the result of 2008 in seven indicators – i.e., (3) aid alignment, (5b) use of country procurement system, (6) decrease of parallel implementation, (7) aid predictability, (8) untied aid, (9) use of common arrangement procedures, and (10b) joint country analytic work. In particular, the results of (3) aid alignment and (10b) joint country analytic work exceeded the average of donor countries (see Table 15).

< Table 15. Results of Korea's Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey >

Indicators 3. Aid flows are aligned on national priorities 4. Strengthen capacity by coordinated support 5a.Use of country public financial management systems 5b. Use of country procurement system 6. Avoid parallel implementation structures 7. Aid is more predictable 8. Aid is untied 9. Use of common arrangements of procedures 10a. Joint missions 10b. Joint country analytic work

Indicator Values 2005 2007 2010 11% 34% 46% 74% 79% 11%49 45% 10% 0% 0% 5% 37% 0 11 4 11% 19% 32% 21% 47% 0% 1% 42% 0% 15% 8% 0% 50%

Illustrative 2010 Targets 85% 50% 26% 0 56% 66% 40% 66%

Donor Average 2010 41% 57% 48% 44% 1,158 43% 86% 45% 19% 43%

* Indicators 1, 2, 11, 12 are related to aid recipient countries

Indicator Values 2005 2007 2010 11% 34% 46% 74% 79% 11%49 45% 10% 0% 0% 5% 37% 0 11 4 11% 19% 32% 21% 47% 0% 1% 42% 0% 15% 8% 0% 50%

Illustrative 2010 Targets 85% 50% 26% 0 56% 66% 40% 66%

Donor Average 2010 41% 57% 48% 44% 1,158 43% 86% 45% 19% 43%

* Indicators 1, 2, 11, 12 are related to aid recipient countries

1.3. Hosting the Busan HLF-4

96. Achievements of the HLF-4 in Busan: Korea hosted the 2011 HLF-4, which has been recorded as one of the largest-scale premier fora for development cooperation, bringing together the

Indicator 2005 2007 2010 2010 target 4. Strengthen capacity by coordinated support 74% 79% 50% 40% Korea has made a request to adjust the survey outcome, as is shown in the table above. For more detailed explanation, (refer to; http://www.koica.go.kr/dev/download.jsp?strFileSavePath=/ICSFiles/afieldfile/2011/10/24/22.pdf&strFileN ame=개발협력 정책과 이슈 2 호.pdf)

- 74 -

broadest range of stakeholders in development from all over the world. As a host country, Korea actively participated in the global preparation process and played a leading role in introducing the paradigm shift from ‘aid effectiveness’ to ‘development effectiveness’ in response to the rapidly changing global development landscape. The agenda of the HLF-4 went beyond foreign aid encompassing a wide range of development issues such as South-South cooperation, PublicPrivate Partnership, climate change financing, effective institutions, gender equality and other development issues for inclusive partnership for effective development cooperation. Korea’s initiative to broaden the agenda derived from Korea’s own development experiences where foreign aid was used as a catalyst to mobilize other development resources such as trade, investment and private flows to achieve sustainable economic development. Korea played a critical role in encouraging the participation of major emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil at the Busan Forum and bridging developed and emerging economies in the negotiation of the outcome document. During the HLF-4, Korea co-organized parliamentary forum, private sector forum, and youth forum, Special Session on Gender Equality and supported the organization of civil society forum, consolidating efforts for a more inclusive partnership for development.

97. Post HLF-4: As an active supporter of the Busan commitments and actions, Korea is improving its development cooperation framework to enhance aid and development effectiveness and is making efforts to strengthen inclusive development partnership. To enhance the effectiveness of development cooperation, Korea is committed to further untying aid, expanding the use of country procurement system, and providing demand-driven assistance by streamlining the CPS. In addition, Korea is considering joining the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) to ensure greater transparency and accountability. To foster inclusive partnership in development cooperation, Korea is expanding triangular cooperation and collaborating with the private sector in various manners (see Box 8). Korea is actively participating in the post HLF-4 deliberations to define the working arrangements of the Busan Partnership and the global monitoring framework to be agreed in June 2012. Korea is participating in the global voluntary initiatives to implement the Busan outcomes by engaging in five Building Blocks of South-South cooperation, private sector, effective institution, climate change financing, and women's empowerment. As Vice Chair of the Post-Busan Interim Group (PBIG), Korea is supporting the participation of emerging economies in the Busan Partnership and working closely with the OECD and the UN to make the global partnership a reality.

< Box 8. Examples of Inclusive Development Partnership >

 Triangular Cooperation

• Korea-Chile Joint Training Program - Budgets are equally shared. A total of 129 trainees participated in 8 training courses during 2003-2010.

• Korea-Peru Joint Project for Improving Crop Production Techniques in Algeria (USD 1.8 million for 2007-2009) - Korean and Peruvian experts on potato were dispatched to Algeria to improve potato breeding that is suitable to the environment and ecosystem of Algeria.

• Korea-Colombia Joint Project for promoting South-South cooperation between Colombia and Latin America on technical capabilities in high technology (USD 500 thousand in 2012) - Through triangular cooperation with Colombia, Korea offered training programs in ICT, automobile and small-medium enterprises sectors to 700 teachers and students of 25 vocational training organizations in 8 Latin American and Caribbean countries.  Partnership with Private Sectors

• (KOICA) KOICA is making various efforts to expand partnership with the private sector, such as the Global CSR Partnership Program in 2010.

• (EDCF) In 2011, Korea Eximbank held policy dialogues and briefings on PPP in Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines, thus provided information on the PPP market environment by country and candidate projects. Accordingly, SOC council was founded in March 2012 to identify large-scale infrastructure projects in Vietnam and the Philippines.

- 75 -

2. Efforts to Further Aid Effectiveness

2.1. Untying Aid

98. Korea has been progressively increasing the proportion of untied aid from 2% in 2006 to 36% in 2010, thereby increasing efficiency in aid delivery, value for money and access to developing countries’ goods and services (see Table 16). Political commitment has been also made in its scheme of untying aid to 75% by 2015 in the policy document such as the Strategic Plan. These were all initiated as Korea’s response to DAC Recommendations of Untying ODA and Recommendation of DAC Special Peer Review in 2008.

< Table 16. Increasing the Proportion of Untied Aid >

Proportion of Untied Aid

2011

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

(tentative)

25%

36%

48%

36%

above 50%

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

Proportion of Untied Aid

2011

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

(tentative)

25%

36%

48%

36%

above 50%

* Source: OECD, International Development Statistics Online DB

99. Korea recognizes the necessity of further untying aid to LDCs and HIPCs and has taken some initial steps in this direction. It will eventually include OLICs and MICs in its scheme of untying. At the moment, KOICA is working to strengthen capacities of local and international bidding, use procurement system of developing countries while EDCF is making efforts to increase cofinancing with MDBs and introduce the program loan. Korea is regularly monitoring and encouraging the increase of the share of untied aid in all of its development cooperation programs (see Box 9). However, in view of challenges of fully untying its aid, and of untying in difficult areas such as emergency relief and fragile settings, Korea is currently reviewing its quantitative target of untied aid for possible adjustment in 2012.

< Box 9. Efforts to Untie Aid >

 (Local and International Bidding) KOICA published manuals on local and international bidding and on international procurement system in 2010. The Agency is bolstering the use of local and international bidding system by expanding cooperation with experts on international public procurement.

 (Introducing Program Loans) EDCF adopted a program loan in 2011 which will be counted as 100% untied. In the initial stage of cooperation, untied aid will be directed to support budget of sectoral programs that have clear objectives. However, in the mid and long-term, EDCF is considering enlarging its assistance to support general budget.

 (Increasing Co-financing with MDBs) EDCF founded MDBs co-financing team in January 2011. EDCF plans to increase cooperation with MDBs, thus it is expected that co-financing with MDBs accounts for 20% of total concessional loans by 2015.

2.2. Supporting Ownership and Capacity Development

100. In view of its past development experiences, Korea recognizes that developing countries’ ownership based on capacity development is one of the prerequisites for a country's successful progress. In this regard, Korea has undertaken various measures for supporting ownership and capacity development of partner countries as follows: (i) Capacity enhancement elements in project: In order to enhance human as well as institutional capacities of partner countries, each ODA project includes various elements for capacity development such as education and training, consulting services for policy and institution building, transfer of technology, and self-sustained operation capacities as well as mid to long-term development plan. (ii) Training program: For government officials from developing countries, Korea provides training programs to share its experiences and technologies accumulated in the process of socio-economic advancement. To

- 76 -

ensure the effectiveness of the training program, Korea is looking into cases where Korean experiences can help developing countries attain development and growth. It is strengthening monitoring and follow-up training such as re-education on new technologies. (iii) Dispatching of volunteers and experts: In an effort to align with the needs and development goals of the partner countries, Korea dispatches volunteers with the aims of facilitating the attainment of the MDGs, sustainable development and capacity building for self-reliance. Korea merged all the overseas volunteer programs run by the Korean government under the umbrella of World Friends Korea (WFK) in order to streamline the operation, thereby reducing administrative burden of the partner countries.

2.3. Alignment

101. In project identification, Korea strongly believes in the need-based identification. Thus its CPS is fully aligned with national priorities of partner countries. For that purpose, Korea holds policy dialogues, and closely works with partner countries. For priority partner countries, the ODA Council is held periodically with the participation of partner countries’ government officials. The project evaluation is managed jointly with the government of partner countries, and information on the results and lessons learned, as well as measures for project improvement are shared among parties.

102. In conducting international development cooperation projects, Korea is making full efforts to use the system of partner countries as much as possible. Country systems are widely used in delivering concessional loans. However, in case the system is deemed unreliable, Korea supports partner countries’ capacity building for enhancing public financial management system and procurement system. For example, KOICA helps partner countries such as Mongolia, Vietnam and Tunisia to build the online procurement system and offers training program for local procurement officers to assist in building their capacities50. EDCF helped improving Vietnam’s procurement system and financial management system in line with the international standard in cooperation with other donors as part of the 6 Banks’s activities. With further application of Program-based Approach (PBA), it is expected that using developing countries’ public finance and budget system, monitoring and auditing will increase.

2.4. Harmonization

103. Korea is strengthening its partnership with major donors and members of the OECD DAC to exchange development assistance experiences and enhance effectiveness of Korea’s international development cooperation. For this purpose, Korea is signing MOUs with other governments and aid agencies by sectors 51 to secure platforms for cooperation, to conduct regular policy dialogues, and to introduce joint projects52. Since the accession to the DAC in 2010, Korea

As for KOICA, the Agency is executing some pilot projects using local procure system of partner countries since 2010 and plans to expand further. During 2010 and 2011, the project for the Establishment of Training Institute for Automobile Industry Occupations in Casablanca, Morocco, and the project for strengthening primary health care in Jenin and Youth Center in Hebron, Palestine were implemented as trial projects in 2010 and 2011 respectively. ① MOFAT concluded MOU on development cooperation with Australia (December 2009), Denmark (May 2010), and USA (July 2011). ; ② KOICA concluded MOU with AusAID, GIZ, JICA, and USAID. ; ③ EDCF concluded MOU with JICA-AFD (in October 2011) and a four-party agreement with aid agencies of Japan, China, and Thailand. Examples of joint projects: ① Joint Program for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation System and Rural Community Development in the Kingdom of Cambodia (KOICA-JICA, 2009); ② Maternal and Child Health Collaboration in Sub-Saharan Africa (KOICA-USAID, 2012); ③ Joint training program with advanced donor agencies (SingaporeJICA-Chile); ④ Joint Research in preparation for the HLF-4 (KOICA-U.S Brookings Institution-JICA, 2011); ⑤ Support Program to Respond to Climate Change in Vietnam (EDCF-JICA-AFD, 2012).

- 77 -

received more extensive exposure and invitation to many international forums, which has allowed it to actively interact and network with other donors. For example, cooperation between ODA executing agencies of Korea and Japan has been increasing (see Box 10). Korea also led the launch of the Asia Development Forum, which brings major donors and partners together to discuss important regional development issues53.

< Box 10. Korea-Japan Joint Projects >

 (KOICA-JICA) Joint Program for the Rehabilitation of Irrigation System and Rural Community Development in the Kingdom of Cambodia (2009) - Target: Vattay Village in Cambodia - Amount: USD 200 thousand - Details: Joint irrigation facility restoration, pilot project for household income generation, field survey, etc.

 (EDCF-JICA) Support Program to Respond to Climate Change in Vietnam (to be approved in 2012) - Target: support the Vietnamese government’s National Target Program to Respond to Climate Change - Amount: USD 30 million - Related agencies: JICA (Japan), AFD (France), etc.

* The Project was identified at the 4th EDCF-JICA Annual Consultation Meeting in January 2009.

104. The Korean ministries and agencies responsible for international development cooperation are actively taking part in donors' group meetings and policy dialogues hosted by the governments of partner countries and MDBs. Korea is continuously making efforts to reflect the development priorities of partner countries and international community, and to prevent overlapping of aid and reduce operation cost. As shown above, ‘Results of Korea’s Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey’ (see Table 15), ‘Use of common arrangements of procedures (indicator 9)’ refers to PBA, for which Korea scored 42%, which is close to the donors’ average. This is due to the fact that a large share of Korea’s concessional loans are categorized as integrated projects with coordinated approach where projects are identified by partner countries’ leadership and extensive use of their public system. In the case of grant aid, KOICA is preparing for the adoption of the PBA in the process of formulating a guideline, following a study conducted in May 2010 and increased harmonization of its programming procedures with other donor countries. Harmonizing its programming procedures with those of other donor countries, such as the ‘6 Banks’, is one of the major areas that Korea is showing progress (see Box 11).

< Box 11. Case of the ‘6 Banks’ in Enhancing Effectiveness in Vietnam >

 (Current Situation) ADB, AFD, JBIC, KfW, WB and EDCF which take up 80% of Vietnam's total ODA formed a Working Group to enhance cooperation among banks and the coordination of aid. • The collaboration among banks in Vietnam started in 1999 by local offices of ADB, JBIC, WB in the country. AFD and KfW joined in 2001, and Korea Eximbank (EDCF) was added in 2007, to form the ‘6 Banks’.

 (Major Activities) The ‘6 Banks’ produces the Joint Portfolio Performance Reviews (JPPR) jointly with the Vietnamese government every two year, and leads the ODA Society in Vietnam to function as the representative of the donor countries. • The ‘6 Banks’ provides not only policy advice on aid process and arrangement in Vietnam, but also on mid and long-term goals of ‘Partnership Group of Aid Effectiveness (PGAE)’ and the execution of the Hanoi Core Statement to enhance aid effectiveness. - EDCF led streamlining the payment and disbursement procedures for improving Vietnamese financial management system, resulting in the creation of related regulations.

Under the leadership of Korea, China, and Japan, many development players from Thailand, India, Vietnam and MDBs have joined the discussions on environment, green growth and public-private partnership. The first forum was held in Korea in 2010, followed by the second forum in Japan 2011. The third forum is scheduled to take place in Thailand in 2012.

- 78 -

â&#x2026;Ľ. Humanitarian Assistance

1. Framework of Humanitarian Assistance and Implementation

1.1. Legal Framework and Major Policy Decisions

105. The Korean government's humanitarian action is anchored in the framework legislation, policy papers and international norms. (i) The Framework Act clearly recognizes that humanitarian assistance is an integral part of Korea's development cooperation; (ii) The Strategic Plan, which is a strategic blueprint for the Mid-term ODA policy, incorporates humanitarian activities into broader development strategy by including humanitarian assistance among its six strategic objectives. It clearly states that Korea will contribute to world peace and prosperity by strengthening humanitarian assistance and peace-building efforts in countries affected by natural disasters and armed conflicts; (iii) Overseas Emergency Relief Act and its Enforcement Ordinance, enacted in 2007, provides a comprehensive legal framework for rapid, effective, systematic cross-governmental and civil response overseas emergencies; (iv) Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief, adopted in May 2010 following the soul-searching over the government's response to Haitian earthquakes in January 2010, has been geared toward a more rapid and efficient response to overseas emergencies through improved crossgovernment coordination and stronger partnerships with NGOs (see paragraph 115); (v) Policy Paper on Humanitarian Assistance drafted in July 2008 specifically underscores the humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. The policy makes a clear reference to the need to ensure that humanitarian activities are funded on the basis of needs assessments and in proportion to needs; and (vi) As a Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) member since July 2009, the Korean government is doing its best to comply with the GHD Principles and Practices as well as the landmark resolution A/RES/46/182 and its ensuing humanitarian instruments adopted in the UN General Assembly. All these legal and policy frameworks, adopted through full participation from key partners and consultation across all concerned ministries, have been steering the Korean government's active participation in the international community's efforts in saving lives, alleviating suffering and maintaining human dignity for those affected by natural and man-made disasters.

1.2. Implementation

106. Humanitarian Needs-based Assistance: Korea allocates its humanitarian funding in proportion to humanitarian needs. As a member of GHD since July 2009, Korea is respecting its needsbased and demand driven funding principles. Korea is using either international (UNOCHA, other international organizations or NGOs) or bilateral (via Korean embassies, missions or KOICA country offices) needs assessments to identify the needs of affected countries. The staff in the Humanitarian Assistance Division of MOFAT follows closely the global funding trends and country situation in a given crisis while taking into account the capacity of affected countries and responses of other international community.

107. Funding Predictability and Flexibility: In particular, as commented by the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008, Korea has been upgrading its humanitarian assistance to be more need-based and more aligned to global standards in order to ensure their effectiveness. Korea participates in the assessment of the UN Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) and Flash Appeal, and in the pooled funding such as the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) or country-specific Emergency Response Fund (ERF), as part of the effort to ensure flexible, predictable and timely funding. Korea earmarks its assistance very loosely as it only indicates the country, agency and cluster. Korea has also introduced multi-year funding for contributions to UNITAID, GAVI and NGOs with funds raised through the air ticket solidarity levy (see paragraph 54).

- 79 -

108. Budget Prospective: With the frequent occurrence of large-scale natural disasters, Korea plans to increase its humanitarian budget to meet the rising demand for humanitarian assistance. Especially, Korea’s emergency relief budget increased sharply from KRW 11 billion in 2008 to KRW 26 billion (1.25% of total bilateral ODA) in 2012 and will further grow in the run up to 2015 as the total ODA budget is expected to expand.

109. Linking Relief to Rehabilitation and Development: To deliver humanitarian assistance in ways that are supportive of recovery, Korea focuses on strengthening the resilience of vulnerable communities and makes an effort to improve coordination between humanitarian and development instruments. When allocating funds for humanitarian operations, MOFAT Humanitarian Division conducts intra-and inter-agency consultations with MOFAT Development Cooperation Division, MOFAT Regional Bureaus, KOICA and other development-related Ministries to develop a coherent overall approach to recovery challenges. In an operational level, Korea supported bilateral programs to help refugees in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Haiti and Guatemala to achieve the goal of helping the people return to live their normal lives and is also planning to implement Transitional Solutions Initiative (TSI) in partnership with UNHCR and UNDP.

110. Progress made in terms of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR): The need to mainstream DRR concerns into all development cooperation has been reflected in the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015. It underpins efforts in promoting DRR, clearly stating its plan to implement development projects such as establishment of early-warning system and disaster prevention system. To encourage risk reduction as part of its strategic frameworks, Korea has included disaster risk reduction and climate change in its CPS with Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Cambodia and other disaster-prone countries. Korea is engaged bilaterally with capacity building projects and training programs on DRR while building strong partnership with agencies such as ASEAN, ARF, East Asia Summit (EAS) by actively participating in discussions on emergency preparedness, contingency planning and all kinds of capacity building at the regional level.

111. International Cooperation: Korea is an active member in the humanitarian donor community and participates in various Donor Support Groups. Korea recognizes that CERF is an effective tool for timely and reliable humanitarian assistance to those affected by natural disasters and armed conflicts. For the last five years since its inception in 2006, Korea has been an active supporter of the CERF and is currently a member of the CERF Advisory Group. In 2012, Korea contributes USD 4 million to CERF, a 33% increase over the previous year. Korea supports the role of CERF in the overall humanitarian architecture reform process. Korea is pursuing active participation in ODSG and GHD, which are donor-based forums and a network for collective advancement of humanitarian principles and good practices. Korea has been closely cooperating with the UNDAC, an international emergency response system for sudden-onset emergencies. Currently, five Korean rescue experts are registered to be part of the UNDAC team. Furthermore in 2011, Korea National Disaster Relief rescue team obtained the Heavy-class qualification for its overseas disaster relief operations, which is the highest level classification accredited by the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG).

2. Overhauling Overseas Emergency Relief System

2.1. Toward a More Effective and Efficient Response to Overseas Emergencies

113. The aforementioned Overseas Emergency Relief Act defines objectives and principles of overseas emergency assistance and enables various forms of relief aid such as deployment of emergency rescue team, provision of relief goods and other in-kind delivery, depending on the severity of the disaster. The Act established a cross-national coordinating mechanism, ‘Public-Private Joint Committee on Overseas Emergency Relief’ that is chaired by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade and mandated to decide whom, what, how and to what extent to help in massive disasters.

- 80 -

114. The Korean government's self-reflection on its response to Haiti earthquakes led to the adoption of the Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief, in May 2010, which seeks the following: (i) More rapid decision-making; (ii) Rapid Search and Rescue (SAR) and other relief team deployment system; (iii) Education and training for higher level of expertise in emergency response activities; (iv) Strengthened partnership with civil society; (v) Greater budget for emergency relief (see Box 12). And Korea also amended the Overseas Emergency Relief Act and its enforcement ordinance in 2011.

< Box 12. Details of Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief >

• Call an inter-ministry emergency meeting, chaired by the Vice Minister of MOFAT, within 24 hours after the outbreak of the disaster.

• Finalize the principle of dispatching emergency response team according to the possibility of deploying the team within 72 hours. Use military aircraft to enable swift rescue activities. Issue official passport to rescue team members.

• Offer overseas emergency relief-related training course to foster rescue team and medical staff. Introduce mobile clinic and other advanced rescue equipment.

• Dispatch MOFAT officer to the field to direct emergency relief activities, Improve pool of experts.

• Build public-private cooperation network for emergency and non-emergency situations. Provide financial and non-financial support to emergency relief team of private organizations. Strengthen overseas emergency response capacities of private organizations.

2.2. Partnership with Civil Society

115. With the increasing role of civilian organizations in disaster relief54, Korea is making efforts to enhance the Korean government's general capacity in humanitarian assistance and to strengthen overseas emergency response capacities of private organizations by constructing joint committee on public-private practices. In 2012, based on the Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief the Korean government selected 8 private organizations with capacities and experiences in overseas disaster relief and plans to provide them with financial assistance so that they can work together in consultation with the government in the event of overseas disaster. Korea will further deepen partnership with civil society by holding consultative meetings with private organizations and opening a homepage on humanitarian assistance.

2.3. Role of Military

116. In sudden-onset crises, Korea aims to mobilize all the available civil measures to provide timely support to the affected countries. However, Korea recognizes that military actors can also play a role in a humanitarian crisis for swift response. Korea has established a coordination mechanism to implement coherent and meaningful partnerships between the civilian and military actors. In order to facilitate the transportation of the relief goods and rescue team, Korea utilizes military aircrafts, in particular, in crises in 15 Asian countries based on special manual drafted through consultation across all concerned ministries. For example, for the March 2011 earthquake in Japan, Korea successfully transported the rescue team and relief goods with five C-130 military aircrafts. In addition, Korea includes military medical staff in an emergency expert pool for emergency medical assistance.

Korea NGO Council for Overseas Cooperation provides training programs to promote understanding on global standards and guidelines on humanitarian assistance and to enhance disaster-preparedness using the handbook of Sphere Project (http://www.sphereproject.org). Meanwhile, some 90 people have participated in the UNHCR e-Center's seminars on emergency preparedness and response in Seoul since its inception in 2000 (http://www.the-ecentre.net).

- 81 -

3. Learning and Accountability

117. Even though Korea’s evaluation function mainly focuses on development cooperation activities, Korea aims to promote accountability and encourage regular evaluations after each large-scale disaster. In 2011, Korea conducted a comprehensive review of its performances to identify how to respond more quickly and effectively in the future. Based on the Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief, Korea plans to undertake evaluations of its own performance in an annual basis. To improve value for taxpayer’s money the evaluation results will be reported to the National Assembly and feedback recommendations and lessons will be reflected in the next year’s programs.

- 82 -

- 83 - 83 -

Context for Korean Development Cooperation Recommendations(2008) Progress in Implementation

Context for Korean Development Cooperation Recommendations(2008)

Progress in Implementation

• Efforts to Consolidate Aid System : CIDC and Supervising Agencies - The responsibilities of the CIDC are specified in the Framework Act (Article 7). The roles of the CIDC are to deliberate on and moderate major matters to ensure that international development cooperation polices are implemented in a comprehensive and systematic manner. - The Framework Act (Article 9) designates that loans, within bilateral development cooperation, shall be supervised by the Minister of Strategy and Finance and grant aid by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. And also cooperation with the international financial institutions, within multilateral development cooperation, shall be supervised by the Minister of Strategy and Finance, and cooperation with other organizations by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The roles and functions of these supervising agencies are also specified in the Framework Act (Article 10).

- Basic Principles: (i) reduce poverty in developing nations; (ii) improve the human rights of women and children, and achieve gender equality; (iii) realize sustainable development and humanitarianism; (iv) promote cooperative economic relations with developing partners; and (v) pursue peace and prosperity in the international community. - Objectives: (i) reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of people in developing nations; (ii) support the development of developing nations and improve the system and conditions for such development; (iii) promote friendly relations and mutual exchanges with developing nations; (iv) contribute toward the resolution of global problems related to international development cooperation; and (v) other matters deemed necessary for realizing the basic principles.

1. Korea could benefit from introducing overall legislation to govern its ODA. Any such ◈ Enacted the Framework Act on International Development Cooperation and the Presidential Decree legislation should clearly set out • The Framework Act defines basic principles and objectives, role of the CIDC, formulation of the Mid-term ODA Policy, Korea’s overall ODA objectives roles and functions of agencies supervising international development cooperation, selection of priority partner countries, and should provide the legal basis evaluation, support for civil organization, and public relations for Korean citizen’s participation. for a consolidated aid system. • Basic Principles and Objectives of the Korea’s International Development Cooperation (Article 3 of the Framework Act)

Ⅰ.

AnnexⅠ. Follow-up to the DAC Special Peer Review for Korea 2008

Ⅰ.

AnnexⅠ. Follow-up to the DAC Special Peer Review for Korea 2008

- 84 - 84 -

• The Framework Act (Article 8) mandated the government to formulate the Mid-term ODA Policy, which sets out policy directions and volume of ODA, and mid-term strategies. The Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015 was approved at the 8th session of the CIDC (December 2010). Based on the Mid-term ODA Policy, Annual Implementation Plans are devised and used since 2011.

3. While the introduction of the ◈ The Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation • Taking into account the global discussions on development cooperation and Korea’s current status, the Korean government Comprehensive ODA Plan and the devised the Strategic Plan for International Development Cooperation (Strategic Plan), which sets out its vision and Mid-Term Strategy is a good strategies. The Strategic Plan was approved at the 7th session of the CIDC (October 2011). beginning, they need to become integrated frameworks rather than • The Strategic Plan introduces the Basic Framework for Korea’s International Development Cooperation as follows: (i) its role as a member country of the OECD DAC; (ii) plans for increasing the ODA volume; (iii) design of a integrated ODA compilations of individual strategies. system according to the Framework Act. Under these matters, the Strategic Plan adopted the 3 core strategies – i.e.; (i) Without such reform, the current Documentation and Utilization of Development Experiences; (ii) Reforming the ODA System; (iii) Strengthening Global structure could constrain efforts to Partnership; and the strategic directions for Broadening the Basis for International Development Cooperation. manage increasing ODA. ◈ The Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plan

• Korean government has taken a number of measures to consolidate the function of the CIDC, as a top coordinating body. This includes more frequent meetings, intensified preliminary screening of agenda by the Working Committee before being tabled at the CIDC and monitoring follow up to its decisions by the CIDC secretariat (the ODA Policy Bureau of PMO).

- The CIDC is composed of 25 members, including the Prime Minister as the chairperson, ministers of 15 ministries, and heads of KOICA and Korea Eximbank along with seven civilian experts who are appointed by the chairperson.

2. The government could consider ◈ Strengthen the Function of the CIDC creating a single entity with sole • The CIDC, as a coordinating body, deliberates and decides the overall ODA policies for greater policy coherence and authority over development cosystematic delivery of aid programs. To strengthen the function of the CIDC, the roles and composition of the CIDC are operation objectives, policy and included in the Framework Act (Article 7). strategy. This entity could develop - The CIDC discusses (i) the Mid-term ODA Policy and Annual Implementation Plans; (ii) matters concerning evaluation; a unified policy framework, which (iii) matters requiring coordination by the whole-of-government level from among policies related to international leads and applies to all parts of the development cooperation; and (iv) other matters deemed important and recommended by the chairperson. ODA system.

- 85 - 85 -

• Furthermore, in order to educate new experts in international development cooperation, the Korean government is supporting curriculum development at graduate schools for international studies, while expanding internship opportunities and the number of JPOs at development cooperation related multilateral organizations.

Korean ODA experts in long-term basis, ‘International Development Education Academy’ was founded in KOICA in March 2010. The Academy provides various tailor-made development education programs including courses on ODA program management and regional studies in response to the ever-increasing demand.

4. Korea would benefit from a ◈ Integrated Approach to Improve Public Awareness formal whole-of-government agreed • Following the deliberation on ‘Whole-of-government Strategy for Public Awareness of ODA’ at the 6th session of the CIDC public awareness strategy. It should (December 2009), concerned ministries have set up a joint task force on public relations under the leadership of the PMO. be multi-year with key messages, The task force is mandated to coordinate, examine, and evaluate public relations activities of respective ODA executing targeted to specific audiences, and agencies. produced in partnership with civil • Since its establishment in 2010, the task force produces and implements the Annual Integrated Plans for ODA Public society organizations. Also, it is Relations. As a result, the task force has achieved the followings: (i) ODA-related information has been included in understandable for emerging donors elementary and middle school text books (since 2010); (ii) the integrated brand identity of the Korea’s ODA has been to need visibility to gain public approved at the 10th session of the CIDC (August 2010); and (iii) an integrated Korea’s ODA website has been launched in support for their development coJanuary 2012. operation efforts. But in the longer ◈ Improved Public Relation Activities term, Korea will want to look at its • Korea is working with major mass media companies for a broader publicity outreach on matters related to ODA, and in visibility practice in the light of the particular has contributed toward program that would encourage the participation the Korean youth in development Paris Declaration and other donors’ cooperation activities. Korea also takes advantage of various occasions for public relations and outreach for the Korea’s behavior where ‘flying the flag’ ODA. For example, at the Busan HLF-4, Korea opened an exhibition of its history as an aid recipient that has been through individual projects is being transformed into a donor country. replaced by taking a share of the credit for the results achieved from ◈ Strengthening Public Education collective interventions. • In order to promote public understanding on international development cooperation and to foster the next generation of

- 86 - 86 -

Progress in Implementation

6. The commitment made at the highest level to increasing development assistance – by the President in his ◈ Formalizing the ODA Scale-up Plan and its Implementation inaugural speech – is positive, as • Following its official pledge to increase the ODA/GNI ratio to 0.25% by 2015, Korea has incorporated its ODA scale-up commitment in policy documents including the Strategic Plan and the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015. Accordingly, a are the targets in the government’s mid-term ODA scale-up plan* is under implementation. In 2010, Korea met its ODA/GNI target ratio of 0.12%, further Vision 2030 to scale-up to 0.118% fulfilling the target as was specified at the DAC Special Peer Review in 2008. And its ODA budget for 2012 stands at KRW ODA/GNI by 2011 and 0.25% by 1.87 trillion with estimated ODA/GNI ratio of 0.15% 2015. It would be useful to have * Target of increasing ODA/GNI ratio(%): (2010) 0.12 (2012) 0.15 (2015) 0.25 these targets widely publicized and formally committed to. Delivering • Since the national budget is the major resource for Korea’s ODA, the government has worked hard to strengthen its public on these targets will improve aid relations in order to obtain public support for the ODA commitment. predictability for Korea and its partners.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅱ. ODA Volume, Channels and Allocations

involvement in major ODA decision-making processes. - Cooperation with Civil Society in Implementation Level: The Strategic Plan recognizes civil society as equal partners and encourages their participation for broader-based development cooperation. The government is currently studying various ways of partnership with civil society, and is seeking to engage private companies’ Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives in ODA delivery in order to enable the private sector to become active agents and supporters of international development cooperation. - Cooperation with Academia: Korea is encouraging universities and research institutes to participate in ODA policy making and project development. Diverse research and survey activities are now outsourced to universities and institutes.

5. The government could further ◈ Increasing Partnership with Civil Society engage in dialogue with civil • The Korean government recognizes CSOs as crucial partners in its international development cooperation endeavors. It is society organizations and draw closely collaborating with CSOs, private enterprises, and academia including universities and research institutes in its ODA programs. Different measures have been undertaken to utilize their expertise. upon their knowledge and expertise to inform development policy and - Participation as Committee Members in Policy Making Process: Korean government enlisted civilian experts as practice. members of the CIDC, the Working Committee for the CIDC, and the Sub-committee for Evaluation to increase public

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅱ. ODA Volume, Channels and Allocations

- 87 - 87 -

• The CIDC, as a top coordinating body, deliberates and decides the overall ODA policies. In addition, the KOICA-EDCF Senior Officers’ Meeting is held regularly apart from the working-level meetings between two organizations to build regional network and strengthen the linkage between grants and concessional loans.

◈ Enhancing Coordination Mechanisms

• Korea overhauled the fragmented and overlapping aid delivery programs of the past to improve synergy and efficacy including the incorporation of the volunteers’ programs, strengthening linkages between grants and loans, and between public and private sectors. Inter-agency and inter-ministerial cooperation is also promoted in this spirits.

8. There is a need for Korea to ◈ Integrated Strategies and Project Implementation System integrate grants and concessional • Korean government devised the Strategic Plan, reflecting the basic principles and objectives defined on the Framework loans to support one clear strategy Act. The Strategic Plan introduced the ‘regional policy frameworks and budget allocation principle’, and proposed the overall and at the country level; the ‘selection of priority partner countries, and the formulation of Country Partnership Strategy (CPS)’ that are common for use of instruments should be driven grants and loans, in order to overcome the shortcomings of previous dual system of development cooperation whereby by objectives and expected grants and loans were managed separately. development outcomes.

fold increase. As of 2010, 37% of Korea’s bilateral ODA was delivered to LDCs. And, the proportion of grants to LDCs tended to increase (from 40.3% in 2006 to 62.1% in 2010). As stated in the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, Korea will selectively provide concessional loans to LDCs by assessing their development need for assistance and debt sustainability.

7. All DAC members comply with ◈ Increasing the Proportion of Grant and Grant Element of Concessional Loan to LDCs the DAC Recommendation on • In order to observe the DAC guidelines for LDCs cooperation, the conditions of delivering concessional loans to LDCs Terms and Conditions of Aid, changed in July 2008 to meet 90% of average grant element for LDCs, complying with the DAC Recommendation on which sets a minimum average Terms and Conditions of Aid. The grant element of concessional loans for all its recipients also tended to increase. grant level that donors’ portfolios to * Grant element for LDCs(%) : (2008) 84.0 (2009) 86.4 (2010) 91.0 (2011) 91.0 LDCs should contain. In time, Korea will want to be clear how it • Aid allocation to LDCs has been on the rise from USD 92.1 million in 2006 to USD 333.4 million in 2010, recording a 3.6 plans to meet this recommendation.

◈ Enhancing Coordination Mechanisms

- 88 - 88 -

10. Korea could develop an overarching strategy for all multilateral ◈ Efforts to Develop Multilateral Assistance Strategy aid, spanning the MDBs, UN and • The Strategic Plan includes a comprehensive multilateral partnership plan, strategic focus, detailing scope, sectors, and other international organizations, methods of assistance. Through the Mid-term ODA Policy for 2011-2015, the Korean government devised aid strategy for assessing the contribution that each MDBs (supervised by MOSF) and for the UN and other multilateral organizations (managed by MOFAT). In particular, organization can make to Korea’s the Multilateral Assistance Committee, which is a sub-committee of the Inter-Agency Grants Committee led by MOFAT, development objectives. It should is a mechanism for cross-governmental coordination on contributions to the UN system and other multilateral be driven by, and fit within, the organizations. overall aid strategy, and it should complement and reinforce bilateral • Meanwhile, PMO surveyed Korea’s contribution to trust funds in multilateral organizations in December 2011, as aid. Further, it would be advisable an effort to gain lessons-learned for enhancement of efficiency and effectiveness of multi-bi ODA allocations. to reduce significantly the number Based on the findings, MOSF and MOFAT are in the process of developing a comprehensive plan, which will include reshuffling the structure of trust funds, as well as the management systems. of organisations (80) that are funded.

9. The increasing geographic focus ◈ Integrated List of Priority Partner Countries of Korea’s aid is welcome. As • In order to ensure predictable and systematic aid delivery, ‘Regional Policy Frameworks and Budget Allocation for 2011Korea scales up it should stay 2015’ was defined in the Strategic Plan. It will be subject for review and adjustment every five years to be better aligned focused, and be aware that 59 with Korea’s strategic priorities. For 2011-2015, Asia remains as the biggest region for Korea’s assistance, followed by Africa. partner countries/23 priority countries remains relatively high • Based on the Regional Policy Frameworks and Budget Allocation for 2011-2015, Korea also came up with newly compared to DAC members with integrated list of 26 priority partner countries*. The list was approved at the 7th session of the CIDC. The 26 priority partner similar levels of ODA. It should countries were selected from countries, which are under the middle-low income groups, based on their level of GNI and create a single list of partner attainment of the MDGs, governance, further cooperation potentials, and their alignment with foreign policy priorities. Korea is now concentrating over 70% of its bilateral ODA in these countries to achieve greater impact. countries consistent with overall policy and objectives. * Asia (11), Africa (8), central and south America (4), Middle East and CIS (2), Oceania (1)

- 89 - 89 -

Progress in Implementation

• KOICA’s International Development Education Academy, which has been established for training ODA professionals, is offering various training courses in areas such as emergency relief, health, education, and evaluation.

• With Korea's plan to increase and improve its international development cooperation, Korea is in the process of creating and systematically managing a pool of human resources composed of country-specific experts, consultants, students, overseas volunteers and others.

◈ Supporting Capacity Development of Civil Society

Plan for 2010-2015, which applies to the EDCF staff, and plans to consistently recruit experts in highly demanded EDCF sectors such as environment, transportation and IT.

12. As Korea scales up its ODA it ◈ Human Resources Development of Aid Agencies will want to professionalize its staff • With the steadily increasing volume of ODA, KOICA and EDCF, as the major aid executing agencies, are making endeavors to reform the organizational structures and develop human resources. Given the importance of human resources further and attract and retain quality development, measures to build up the professional capacities of their personnel are incorporated in the Annual staff. Greater co-ordination and Implementation Plan. consolidation could lead to efficiency gains-working ‘smarter’ - KOICA has developed the Mid-term Staff Training Strategy for 2012-2016 and plans to upgrade its professional capacity by recruiting more staff and mid-career level experts. Korea Eximbank also develops the Integrated Mid-term Training not ‘harder’.

11. With a less fragmented aid system, and more unified strategies, particularly at the country level, the ◈ Formulating Country Partnership Strategy(CPS) coherence efficiency and potential • Korea furthers its efforts to devise a CPS for each priority partner country and to use it as the basic guideline for delivering impact of Korean development aid at the country level. (Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) has been changed to Country Partnership Strategy (CPS)). activities could be increased. Country - In each CPS, two or three core sectors are identified for each country to enhance aid effectiveness, and a mid-term budget Assistance Strategies should be used plan is incorporated to improve predictability. This helps development players and stakeholders to carry out development as active management tools to cooperation projects in a more consistent and coherent manner. develop integrated implementation plans for all Korean aid agencies operating in a country.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅲ. Organisation and management of Korean development co-operation

◈ Supporting Capacity Development of Civil Society

Plan for 2010-2015, which applies to the EDCF staff, and plans to consistently recruit experts in highly demanded EDCF sectors such as environment, transportation and IT.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅲ. Organisation and management of Korean development co-operation

- 90 - 90 -

• According to the Framework Act (Article 13) and the Guidelines on the Evaluation (Article 10), PMO reports the results of the integrated evaluation to the National Assembly and also posts them on the ODA web site. And, aid executing agencies (KOICA, EDCF) also release their evaluation results reports fully and openly on their websites.

◈ Increasing Participation and Transparency

• Aid agencies take into consideration the suggestions and feedbacks from the previous evaluation results when planning, identifying and implementing new and similar aid projects in the following year, while reflecting them in the follow-up measures. Thus, the feedback mechanism has been institutionalized to improve the impact of aid.

13. Korea would benefit from ◈ Integrated Evaluation System building a strong independent • Korea established an integrated evaluation mechanism for its international cooperation development. Accordingly, the evaluation culture in line with ‘Guidelines on Integrated Evaluation and its Manual’ were adopted, and the ‘Sub-committee for Evaluation’ was formed international standards. This could under the CIDC (December 2009). include improving ongoing - The integrated evaluation system is divided into two tracks - i.e., Self-evaluation and Evaluation carried out by the Submonitoring during project committee. (i) Self-evaluation is conducted by aid executing agencies, which report the evaluation plans and the selfimplementation, improving ex-post evaluation results to the Sub-committee for Evaluation before and after conducting its own evaluation; (ii) The Subevaluation, and integrating lessons committee conducts its own evaluations of selected projects and programs by policy and strategy, country, and sector in from evaluation into future order to strengthen the objectivity of the evaluation. programs. Evaluations could consistently be made public in ◈ Strengthen Evaluation Capacities of Aid Agencies and Feedback Mechanism order to improve accountability.

◈ Increasing Participation and Transparency

- 91 - 91 -

Progress in Implementation

15. Korea is aware that it needs to ◈ Untying Aid untie its aid further. The ‘Roadmap • Korea has endeavored to increase the proportion of untied aid, including its scheme untying aid to 75% by 2015 in the on Untying’ is a positive start, but, policy document such as the Strategic Plan. Recognizing the necessity of further untying aid to LDCs and HIPCs, Korea significant progress is required, and has taken some initial steps in this direction. It will eventually include OLICs and MICs in its scheme of untying. the government should be mindful • Korea has been progressively increasing the proportion of untied aid from 2% in 2006 to 36% in 2010, thereby increasing that it must fully comply with the efficiency in aid delivery, value for money and access to developing countries’ goods and services. At the moment, KOICA DAC recommendation on untying is working to strengthen capacities of local and international bidding, use procurement system of developing countries while within a reasonable timeframe after EDCF is making efforts to increase co-financing with MDBs and introduce program loan. it joins the DAC.

- Harmonization: To strengthen its partnership with major donors and members of the OECD DAC, Korea is signing MOU with other governments and aid agencies by sectors to secure platforms for cooperation, to conduct regular policy dialogues, and to introduce joint projects. The Korean ministries and agencies responsible for international development cooperation are actively taking part in donors' group meetings and policy dialogues hosted by the government of partner countries and MDBs.

14. Korea should be commended ◈ Participating in the Monitoring Survey of the Paris Declaration • Korea participated in the Paris Declaration Monitoring Survey for the third time in 2011. It showed improvement compared for signing the Paris Declaration to the result of 2008 in seven indicators, - i.e., (3) aid alignment, (5b) use of country procurement system, (6) decrease of and for taking part in the parallel implementation, (7) aid predictability, (8) untied aid, (9) use of common arrangement procedures, and (10b) joint monitoring survey. Korea is country analytic work. In particular, the results of (3) aid alignment and (10b) joint country analytic work exceeded the advised to continue to make average of donor countries. progress on aligning its aid with partner countries’ national systems. ◈ Efforts to Enhance Aid Effectiveness It is also encouraged to co-ordinate • Korea has taken various measures to upgrade its ODA systems to achieve greater aid effectiveness based on the Strategic and harmonize with other donors, Plan. To comply with the ‘Principles of the Paris Declaration’ and the ‘Accra Agenda for Action’, Korea is making persistent efforts for alignment, harmonization, and result-based management. including through the use of joint projects and delegated co- Alignment: Korea strongly believes in the need-based identification, thus its CPS is fully aligned with national priorities of operation, especially with donors in partner countries. In conducting international development cooperation projects, Korea is making full efforts to use the areas where Korea does not have system of partner countries as much as possible. In case the system is deemed unreliable, Korea supports partner countries’ experience or presence. capacity building for enhancing public financial management system and procurement system.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅳ. Aid Effectiveness

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅳ. Aid Effectiveness

- 92 - 92 -

Progress in Implementation

with civil society; (v) Greater budget for emergency relief.

17. Korea is commended for increasing humanitarian aid ◈ Need-based and Aligned to Global Standard Approach • Korea is respecting GHD’s needs-based and demand driven funding principles. Korea is using either international spending; as it scales up, and in line (UNOCHA, other international organizations or NGOs) or bilateral (via Korean embassies, missions or KOICA country with the provisions of the Overseas offices) needs assessments to identify the needs of affected countries. Emergency Relief Act, it should ensure that its humanitarian • Korea has been upgrading its humanitarian assistance to be more need-based and more aligned to global standards in order activities are needs-based, not to ensure their effectiveness. Korea participates in the assessment of the UN Consolidated Appeals Process (CAP) and Flash driven by visibility objectives, and Appeal, and in the pooled funding such as the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) or country-specific Emergency Response Fund (ERF), as part of the effort to ensure a flexible, predictable and timely funding. Korea earmarks its are delivered within the framework assistance very loosely as it only indicates the country, agency and cluster. Korea has also introduced multi-year funding for of a coordinated international contributions to UNITAID, GAVI and NGOs with funds raised through the air ticket solidarity levy. response. It should look to the experience of other doors who often predominantly use multilateral and ◈ More Effective and Efficient Response to Overseas Emergencies • Korean government devised the Plan for the Advancement of Overseas Emergency Relief in May 2010, which seeks the pooled funding channels, rather following: (i) More rapid decision-making; (ii) Rapid Search and Rescue (SAR) and other relief team deployment system; than develop parallel bilateral (iii) Education and training for higher level of expertise in emergency response activities; (iv) Strengthened partnerships delivery system.

16. The new policy on humanitarian ◈ Devising Policy Paper on Humanitarian Assistance aid should contain an explicit • Policy Paper on Humanitarian Assistance drafted in July 2008 specifically underscores the humanitarian principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. The policy makes a clear reference to the need to ensure that commitment to the Good humanitarian activities are funded on the basis of needs assessments and in proportion to needs. Humanitarian Donorship principles and good practices, including the core ◈ Joined the Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) principles of humanity, impartiality, • Korea has joined GHD (Good Humanitarian Donorship) since July 2009. As a GHD member, the Korean government is neutrality and independence. doing its best to comply with the GHD Principles and Practices as well as the landmark resolution A/RES/46/182 and its ensuing humanitarian instruments adopted in the UN General Assembly.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅴ. Humanitarian action

with civil society; (v) Greater budget for emergency relief.

Recommendations(2008)

Ⅴ. Humanitarian action

AnnexⅡ. Organization chart

< Overall Framework of the Korea’s development cooperation >

Committee for International Development Cooperation

• Chair: Prime Minister • Member: Minister of relevant ministries and civilian experts

Working Committee

• Chair: Vice Minister for Government Policy(PMO) • Member: Chiefs of Bureaus and civilian experts

consultation

Ministry of Strategy and Finance • Supervision of concessional loans and multilateral aid of MDBs

Korea Eximbank (EDCF)

workinglevel consultation

Other Ministries

• Chair: Vice Minister for Government Policy(PMO) • Member: Chiefs of Bureaus and civilian experts

Prime Minister’s Office

• Secretariat for the CIDC

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade workinglevel consultation

• Supervision of grant aid and multilateral aid of the UN and others

• Supervision of concessional loans and multilateral aid of MDBs

KOICA

Korea Eximbank (EDCF)

(Executive Board)

(Fund Management Council)

Working relationship

(Fund Management Council)

< Number of Staff (central Government Ministries) > Ministry

Bureau/Division

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

• Planning and Coordination Division • International Cooperation Division • Development Cooperation Support Division

Number of staff

Ministry

and Trade

<International Economic Affairs Bureau> • Development Cooperation Division

Prime Minister’s Office

Ministry of Strategy 23

<International Finance Bureau> • International Financial Institutions Division

• Development Policy Division • Development Cooperation Division • Humanitarian Assistance Division

Other Ministries

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade workinglevel consultation

• Supervision of grant aid and multilateral aid of the UN and others

Working relationship

KOICA (Executive Board)

Bureau/Division

Number of staff

and Finance

<Development Cooperation Bureau> Ministry of Foreign Affairs

workinglevel consultation

< Number of Staff (central Government Ministries) >

<ODA Policy Bureau> Prime Minister’s Office

consultation

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

• Planning and Coordination Division • International Cooperation Division • Development Cooperation Support Division

<International Economic Affairs Bureau> • Development Cooperation Division 23 <International Finance Bureau> • International Financial Institutions Division <Development Cooperation Bureau>

Ministry of Foreign Affairs 33

and Trade

• Development Policy Division • Development Cooperation Division • Humanitarian Assistance Division

- 93 -

AnnexⅡ-1. Organization chart of KOICA

President Audit Office

President

Executive Board Evaluation Office

Assistant to the President

Audit Office

Evaluation Office

Assistant to the President

overseas office

Gender Desk Office Environment Desk Office vice president

vice president

Gender Desk Office Environment Desk Office vice president

vice president

Planning & Budget Office

Personnel Affairs Office

Civil Society Cooperation Office

Humanitarian Assistance and Multilateral Cooperation Office

International Development Cooperation Center

Climate Change Office

Public Relations Office

Public Relations Office • General Policy Team • Social Development Team • Economic Development Team

Policy Planning Department

• Procurement Contract Team • Management Support Team • Financial Accounting Team

Management Support Department

Executive Board

vice president

• General Policy Team • Social Development Team • Economic Development Team

Policy Planning Department

• Procurement Contract Team • Management Support Team • Financial Accounting Team

Management Support Department

Asia Department Ⅰ

• Southeast Asia TeamⅠ • Southeast Asia TeamⅡ

Asia Department Ⅰ

• Southeast Asia TeamⅠ • Southeast Asia TeamⅡ

Asia Department

• Southwest Asia Team • Central Asia & CIS Team

Asia Department

• Southwest Asia Team • Central Asia & CIS Team

• East Africa Team • West Africa Team

Africa Department

• Latin America Team • Middle East & Afghanistan Team

Middle East & Latin America Department

• East Africa Team • West Africa Team

Africa Department

• Latin America Team • Middle East & Afghanistan Team

Middle East & Latin America Department

World Friends Korea Administrative Headquarters

• World Friends Korea Planning Team • WorldFriendsKoreaRecruitment &TrainingTeam • World Friends Korea Program Operations Team

World Friends Korea Administrative Headquarters

• World Friends Korea Planning Team • WorldFriendsKoreaRecruitment &TrainingTeam • World Friends Korea Program Operations Team

Capacity Development Department

• Capacity Development Planning Team • Capacity Development Program Team

Capacity Development Department

• Capacity Development Planning Team • Capacity Development Program Team

Overseas Office ( 44 resident missions)

Asia(16)

Nepal, Laos, Mongolia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Afghanistan PRT, Indonesia, East Timor, Cambodia, Philippines, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, Solomon Islands

Africa(14)

Ethiopia, Nigeria, Ghana, Rwanda, Mozambique, Uganda, Cameroon, DR Congo, Egypt, Morocco, Senegal, Tanzania, Tunisia, Algeria

Latin America(8)

Paraguay, Peru, Colombia, Bolivia, Guatemala, Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti

CIS & Middle East(6)

Uzbekistan, Azerbaijian , Iraq(Baghdad, Erbil), Palestine, Jordan

< * Number of staff (KOICA): 247 (Headquarter: 165, Overseas: 82) >

Overseas Office ( 44 resident missions)

Asia(16)

Nepal, Laos, Mongolia, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Afghanistan PRT, Indonesia, East Timor, Cambodia, Philippines, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, Solomon Islands

Africa(14)

Ethiopia, Nigeria, Ghana, Rwanda, Mozambique, Uganda, Cameroon, DR Congo, Egypt, Morocco, Senegal, Tanzania, Tunisia, Algeria

Latin America(8)

Paraguay, Peru, Colombia, Bolivia, Guatemala, Ecuador, El Salvador, Haiti

CIS & Middle East(6)

Uzbekistan, Azerbaijian , Iraq(Baghdad, Erbil), Palestine, Jordan

< * Number of staff (KOICA): 247 (Headquarter: 165, Overseas: 82) >

- 94 -

AnnexⅡ-2. Organization chart of EDCF

< Cooperation System of EDCF >

Other Relevant Ministries

Fund Management Council

(Deliberation Council)

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

(Operating Body)

(Official Window)

(Operating Body)

(Official Window)

Export-Import Bank of Korea

(Executing Agency)

EDCF Operating Group

Asia Department

• Asia Team Ⅰ • Asia Team Ⅱ • Co-financing Team

• OperationsServicesTeam • Evaluations Team

Latin America & Africa Department • Latin America Team • Southwest Asia Team • Africa Team

< Cooperation System of EDCF >

Overseas

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Export-Import Bank of Korea

Operations Services & Evaluations Department

• Planning Team • Policy&Program Team

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

EDCF Planning Group

Planning Department

Other Relevant Ministries

EDCF Planning Group

EDCF Operating Group

Operations Services & Evaluations Department

Planning Department

• Planning Team • Policy&Program Team

Asia Department

• Asia Team Ⅰ • Asia Team Ⅱ • Co-financing Team

• OperationsServicesTeam • Evaluations Team

Latin America & Africa Department • Latin America Team • Southwest Asia Team • Africa Team

< Cooperation System of EDCF >

office with at least two staffs(3)

Vietnam(Hanoi), Philippines(Manila), Indonesia(Jakarta)

single appointment as country director(5)

Tanzania, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, OECD DAC

Overseas

Networks

office with at least two staffs(3)

Vietnam(Hanoi), Philippines(Manila), Indonesia(Jakarta)

single appointment as country director(5)

Tanzania, Colombia, South Africa, Bolivia, OECD DAC

Networks

< * Number of staff (Eximbank EDCF Group) : 84 (Headquarter: 73, Overseas: 11) >

- 95 -

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[2008DAC Special Peer Review]

DAC Special Peer Review

OECD, 외교통상부

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW

This is a hard copy of the report published by the OECD Development Co-operation Directorate on August 8, 2008, in Paris [DCD(2008)7]. The report has been prepared by the OECD/DAC review team for the Special Review of Korea‟s development co-operation. It is supplemented by the Memorandum of the Republic of Korea submitted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea.

- 99 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

ACRONYMS

CAS CERF CIDC

Country Assistance Strategy Central Emergency Response Fund Committee for International Development Co-operation

CAS CERF CIDC

Country Assistance Strategy Central Emergency Response Fund Committee for International Development Co-operation

DAC

Development Assistance Committee

DAC

Development Assistance Committee

EDCF

Economic Development Cooperation Fund

EDCF

Economic Development Cooperation Fund

GNI

Gross national income

GNI

Gross national income

KOICA

Korea International Co-operation Agency

KOICA

Korea International Co-operation Agency

LDCs LIC LMIC

Least developed countries Lower income country Lower middle income country

LDCs LIC LMIC

Least developed countries Lower income country Lower middle income country

MDB MDG MOFAT MOPAN MOSF

Multilateral Development Bank Millennium Development Goal Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Multilateral Organizations Performance Assessment Network Ministry of Strategy and Finance

MDB MDG MOFAT MOPAN MOSF

Multilateral Development Bank Millennium Development Goal Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Multilateral Organizations Performance Assessment Network Ministry of Strategy and Finance

ODA

Official development assistance

ODA

Official development assistance

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PCD

Policy Coherence for Development

PCD

Policy Coherence for Development

SWAps UMIC UN

Sector Wide Approaches Upper middle income country United Nations

SWAps UMIC UN

Sector Wide Approaches Upper middle income country United Nations

- 100 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

Korea’s Aid at a Glance

- 101 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

Korea’s Aid at a Glance

- 101 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................ 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 6

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA ................................... 9

Context for Korean Development Co-operation................................................................. 9 1.1 History and context ................................................................................................... 9 1.2 The legal framework ................................................................................................. 9 1.3 Koreaâ&#x20AC;&#x;s aid architecture........................................................................................... 10 1.4 Building-up public awareness ................................................................................. 11 1.5 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 12 2. ODA volume, channels and allocations ........................................................................... 12 2.1 Increasing aid - a big challenge ............................................................................... 12 2.2 More bilateral aid and more grants .......................................................................... 14 2.3 Increasing the focus on LDCs and other low income countries .............................. 15 2.4 Maintaining a credible level of bilateral ODA to priority countries ....................... 16 2.5 Ensuring a focus on a limited number of sectors..................................................... 17 2.6 Multilateral aid and other aid modalities ................................................................. 17 2.7 Cross-cutting issues ................................................................................................. 18 2.8 Private sector ........................................................................................................... 18 2.9 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 18 3. Organisation and management of Korean development co-operation.............................. 19 3.1 The four main actors (MOFAT, KOICA, MOSF and EDCF)................................. 19 3.2 The importance of good co-ordination and co-operation between all ministries and agencies ............................................................................................ 20 3.3 Ensuring the appropriate staff to manage an increasing aid budget ........................ 20 3.4 Monitoring and evaluation ...................................................................................... 21 3.5 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 22 4. Aid effectiveness .............................................................................................................. 22 4.1 Committed to the aid effectiveness agenda ............................................................. 22 4.2 Ownership and alignment ........................................................................................ 22 4.3 A need to untie bilateral aid .................................................................................... 23 4.4 Harmonisation ......................................................................................................... 24 4.5 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 24 5. Humanitarian action ......................................................................................................... 24 5.1 Humanitarian policy and practice............................................................................ 24 5.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................... 25

ANNEX A ORGANISATION CHARTS .................................................................................. 26

- 102 -

ANNEX A ORGANISATION CHARTS .................................................................................. 26

- 102 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

Tables Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5.

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

Tables Bilateral ODA by region and income groups ...................................................... 15 Priority partner countries ..................................................................................... 16 Staff numbers 2007 ............................................................................................. 21 Indicators on Aid Effectiveness for Korea .......................................................... 22 Tying status of bilateral ODA commitments 2004-06 (USD) ............................. 23

Figures

Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5.

Bilateral ODA by region and income groups ...................................................... 15 Priority partner countries ..................................................................................... 16 Staff numbers 2007 ............................................................................................. 21 Indicators on Aid Effectiveness for Korea .......................................................... 22 Tying status of bilateral ODA commitments 2004-06 (USD) ............................. 23

Figures

Figure 1. Korea's ODA system ........................................................................................... 10 Figure 2. Korea's net ODA ................................................................................................. 13 Figure A.1. Organisation Chart - KOICA................................................................................ 26 Figure A.1. Co-operation System of EDCF ............................................................................. 27

- 103 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. At the request of the government of the Republic of Korea, 1 the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) agreed to conduct a Special Review of Korea‟s international development co-operation. The review‟s main objective is to contribute good practice and lessons learned to the Korean authorities‟ internal dialogue on the reform of their development assistance. Korea aims to become a member of the DAC in 2010, and although this review is not a formal part of that process, it should contribute to Korea‟s progression as a donor with DAC membership in mind. The review should also provide interesting insights for the ongoing discussions between DAC and non-DAC members on development co-operation.

2. On the basis of agreed terms of reference for the Special Review, a DAC Peer Review Team composed of examiners from Australia and Canada and three staff members from the OECD Development Co-operation Directorate visited Seoul from 3 to 6 March 2008. The team consulted officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT), the Ministry of Strategy and Finance (MOSF), the Korea International Co-operation Agency (KOICA), and the Korea Eximbank‟s Economic Development and Co-operation Fund (EDCF). The team also met with representatives of selected non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and development co-operation academics. This report outlines the team‟s findings and observations on Korean international development co-operation from those consultations.

3. The report is organised around five major sections. Section 1 describes the context of Korean development co-operation with a focus on history, legal framework, aid architecture and public awareness. Section 2 examines aid volume, channels and allocations. Section 3 covers organisation and management. Section 4 considers aid effectiveness while section 5 deals with humanitarian action. Each section ends with suggested actions for the Korean Government to consider as it expands and improves its development assistance programmes.

The framework and architecture of Korea’s development co-operation

4. Korea is keen to develop its position as a donor and has recent development knowledge and experience to share with others. Currently, it has no overall legislation to govern its development cooperation. It could consider introducing such legislation which should clearly set out Korea‟s overall ODA objectives and provide the legal basis for a consolidated aid system.

5. The Korean aid architecture is based on two main pillars. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT) is responsible for Korea‟s grant aid policy which is implemented by the Korea International Co-operation Agency (KOICA). The Ministry of Strategy and Finance determines concessional loan policy, which is implemented by the Korea Eximbank‟s Economic Development and Co-operation Fund (EDCF). In addition, a further 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities are involved in providing small amounts of grant aid, mainly in the form of technical co-operation.

The Republic of Korea is hereafter referred to as „Korea‟ in this report.

- 104 -

The Republic of Korea is hereafter referred to as „Korea‟ in this report.

- 104 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

6. The government could consider tackling this two pillar system and creating a single entity with sole authority over development co-operation objectives, policy and strategy. This organisation could develop a unified policy framework, which leads and applies to all parts of the ODA system.

ODA volumes, channels and allocations

7. Korea‟s ODA has been increasing slowly but steadily since the start of the decade, and in 2007 it amounted to USD 673 million (net disbursements), representing 0.07% of GNI. The previous government announced ODA/GNI targets of 0.118% by 2010 and 0.25 % by 2015, but the plan is being reviewed under the new administration. Any targets should be formally and firmly committed to by the government as a whole. Korea also faces a special situation: the support that it gives to the northern part of the peninsula. This assistance is estimated by Korea to be USD 558 million in 2007 but since it is not formally reported to the DAC, it is not officially verified or recorded as ODA.

8. A feature of the Korean development system is the large use of concessional loans, partly explained by Korea‟s own positive experience as a recipient of loans, and the profoundly held belief that this instrument imposes essential fiscal discipline on the recipient country. Loans are a valid tool for development in the right circumstances, but Korea should take note of the global efforts to reduce debt and ensure debt sustainability, especially in least developed countries (LDCs). Hence, it is of concern that the grant element of bilateral ODA commitments to LDCs in Korea‟s aid portfolio is below the percentage required in the DAC Recommendations on Terms and Conditions of Aid – all DAC members are expected to meet this recommendation.

Organisation and management

9. The Korean development co-operation system is fragmented, with four main actors (MOFAT, MOSF, KOICA and EDCF) and around 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities implementing separate assistance operations for each partner country, and this lack of co-ordination creates inefficiencies.

10. Positive steps have been taken to address these problems, notably with the introduction of the mid-term Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) for the priority countries. They set out Korea‟s strategy and planned activities, but at present KOICA and EDCF each produce a separate CAS for a given country. It would be better, however, if there were a unified CAS for each country. There is a master-plan Integrated Country Assistance Strategy 2008-10 which outlines Korean aims in all priority countries, but this appears to be a compilation of separate Korean interventions, and could be improved by being a collectively designed strategic action plan. A lack of unified strategies, particularly at the country level, undermines the coherence, efficiency and potential impact of development activities.

Increasing the effectiveness of aid

11. Korea is committed to increasing the effectiveness of its aid and has taken the positive step of signing the Paris Declaration and taking part in the monitoring survey in 2006 – the only non-DAC country to do so. Korea has taken some steps to align its aid with partner countries‟ national systems, and is advised to continue to make progress on this. It is also encouraged to co-ordinate and harmonise with other donors. Korea may wish to consider the use of joint projects and delegated co-operation, especially with donors in areas where Korea does not have experience or presence.

12. Korea is aware that it needs to untie its aid. An estimated 98% of Korean bilateral aid is either tied or partially tied – an extremely high proportion, and at odds with a key DAC

- 105 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

recommendation. Korea has introduced a Roadmap on Untying which is a positive start, but significant progress is required, and the government should be mindful that it must fully comply with the DAC recommendation on untying within a reasonable timeframe of acceding to the DAC.

Humanitarian Action

13. Korea has expanded its humanitarian aid efforts in recent years, and in 2006 allocated USD 23 million, or 5% of its gross bilateral ODA to humanitarian activities. Korea‟s main bilateral interventions are in large-scale natural disasters, to which it responds by sending goods and funds, as well as professional relief workers and volunteers. It also has begun to work through multilateral channels, funding the humanitarian UN agencies directly, and contributing to UN Inter-Agency Consolidated Appeals and the Central Emergency Response Fund.

14. In 2007 Korea undertook a number of reforms to improve its humanitarian system, including the introduction of an Overseas Emergency Relief Act, the creation of a Humanitarian Aid Division within MOFAT and the development of an emergency relief operational manual. It is also planning to introduce a policy on humanitarian aid – which it is lacking at present. This policy should contain an explicit commitment to the Good Humanitarian Donorship principles and good practice, including the core principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. Korea should ensure that its humanitarian activities are needs-based, not driven by donor visibility objectives, and are delivered within the framework of a co-ordinated international response.

- 106 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA

Context for Korean Development Co-operation

1.1

History and context

1.1

History and context

1. Korea is one of the most successful economic transformation stories of the twentieth century. From 1945 to the present, rapid growth has propelled Korea to its current position as the thirteenth largest economy in the world. Part of its success was due to its effective use of official development assistance (ODA) – the government estimates that it received USD 12.7 billion in the post-war period which helped spur economic development and decrease poverty. Now Korea has successfully moved from being an aid recipient to becoming an aid donor.

2. Korea is eager to play a role in the international donor community that is commensurate with its economic size. It joined the OECD in 1996 and the Special Review is one more step to fully integrate it into the development community, conducted with a view to Korea attaining Development Assistance Committee (DAC) membership in 2010. Korea is keen to develop its position as a donor. It has firsthand experience of being an aid recipient, knows the importance and value of the effective use of aid, and has recent knowledge and experience to share with others who are in the process of development.

1.2

The legal framework

3. Korea is a new and emerging donor, and understandably is facing a number of key challenges. As yet, its development assistance has no over-arching legal basis which has contributed to a lack of over-arching policy or strategy.

4. This gap in overall direction is due to the short history and bottom-up development of the aid system so far. Korea began its aid activities in the 1970s and 1980s with the provision of technical training, and only in the late 1980s and early 1990s made a more concerted effort to broaden and increase its ODA. In 1987 the Economic Development and Co-operation Fund (EDCF) was founded to provide concessional loans to developing countries, and in 1991 the Korea International Co-operation Agency (KOICA) was created to implement grants (section 1.3 and Figure 1 for more information on the Korean aid architecture). These organisations were established by two separate Acts, both of which define the goals of Korea‟s bilateral ODA as: firstly the promotion of „mutually co-operative relationships‟; and secondly, the „economic and social development‟ of developing countries. 2 The clearly defined objective of mutual benefit to both the donor and to the recipient country is important in understanding Korea‟s thinking, and to some extent drives policy choices such as the heavy use of loans and tied aid (sections 2.2 and 4.3).

5. Along with the laws founding EDCF and KOICA, there are also a number of other separate pieces of legislation such as a recent Act on overseas emergency relief. However, there is no over-

From An Evaluation of Korea‟s 20-Year ODA – Kye Woo LEE, Gi Hoon Park. Korean Development Review Volume 29, No 2.

- 107 -

From An Evaluation of Korea‟s 20-Year ODA – Kye Woo LEE, Gi Hoon Park. Korean Development Review Volume 29, No 2.

- 107 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

arching legal framework for development co-operation. This question has been raised in the National Assembly and four competing drafts of legislation were proposed in the previous National Assembly session, although all of them were automatically abandoned as the session was closed without reaching any agreement. This illustrates the challenge in arriving at an agreed and unified vision of the future Korean aid system. Korea could consider introducing ODA legislation which should set out a coherent and integrated development system, with clear aims and objectives based on agreed international commitments including poverty reduction and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), from which clear integrated strategies and policies can flow.

1.3

Korea’s aid architecture

1.3

Korea’s aid architecture

6. The Korean aid architecture is based on two main pillars, but also includes a number of other much smaller actors. Just as there is no over-arching development assistance legislation, there is also no over-arching development assistance policy or strategy. MOFAT is responsible for roughly half of all bilateral ODA through grants implemented by its executing agency, KOICA. MOSF3 is responsible for roughly the other half, overseeing the loans implemented through the Korea Eximbank‟s EDCF. Multilateral aid is also split, with MOFAT responsible for the UN agencies and MOSF responsible for the international development banks. Furthermore, as many as 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities execute some small development assistance projects and programmes using their own budget lines and that are generally detached from MOFAT and MOSF.

Figure 1. Korea's ODA system

Authorities concerned

Executing organization

Types of cooperation

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Korean Int’l Cooperation agency (KOICA)

Grant aid and technical cooperation

Grants

The Export-Import Bank of Korea

EDCF loans

Loans

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

Contributions to international orgs.

Executing organization

Types of cooperation

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Korean Int’l Cooperation agency (KOICA)

Grant aid and technical cooperation

Grants

The Export-Import Bank of Korea

EDCF loans

Loans

Bilateral aid Ministry of Strategy and Finance

ODA Multilateral aid

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

Subscriptions to int’l institutions Bilateral & multilateral aid

Other Ministries

Authorities concerned

Contributions to international orgs.

Bilateral aid ODA Multilateral aid

Subscriptions to int’l institutions Bilateral & multilateral aid

Other Ministries

7. The Korean system functions as two pillars, and although MOFAT/KOICA and MOSF/EDCF consult, they do not fully co-ordinate. They follow separate policies and strategies in the same partner countries. There has been some effort to bring strategy together, notably with the creation in 2006 of the Committee for International Development Co-operation (CIDC), a Prime Minister led body comprising Ministers and civil society representatives, with „a mandate to deliberate the key

A combination of the previously entitled Ministry of Finance and Economy and the Ministry of Planning and Budget, as of February 2008.

- 108 -

A combination of the previously entitled Ministry of Finance and Economy and the Ministry of Planning and Budget, as of February 2008.

- 108 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

policies and plans of Korea’s development Assistance’.4 The CIDC has approved planning tools such as the Comprehensive ODA Improvement Plan, the Mid-term ODA Strategy 2008-2010, the Annual Operation Plan and the Integrated Mid-term CAS Strategy 2008-2010. These instruments are a good first effort to introduce longer-term planning and to co-ordinate better across the Ministries. However, they appear to be an assembly of separate plans from the two pillars and could be improved by being genuinely integrated strategic plans. With the recent change of government, the CIDC is being reviewed. Any successor organisation should be tasked with promoting a cohesive and integrated approach to setting Korea‟s development assistance strategy.

8. Korea could benefit from consolidating the number of organisations involved in development assistance. It would profit from having a single entity that has sole authority over development co-operation policy, that co-ordinates and ensures a whole-of-government development policy, and that is overall accountable for Korea‟s policy and programmes. This body should have overall responsibility for ensuring the aid policy is implemented, but implementation could be carried out by a separate agency, and a number of different actors could contribute. This is not to imply that one body alone should determine policy or implement all aid, but rather that all aid policies and activities should be co-ordinated and overseen by a single body to ensure that they fit into a coherent whole.

1.4

Building-up public awareness

9. The government is determined that Korea should increase its international activities and standing, and play a role on the global stage in keeping with its size. But for many Koreans this outlook is relatively new, as is the subject of development assistance.

10. It is commendable that a number of public awareness surveys have been carried out. In 2005, in a survey by Gyunggi University on behalf of MOSF5, 44% of people said they were „somewhat aware of ODA‟ while 46% said they had „heard but were not fully aware of ODA‟. 18% of people surveyed were strongly in favour of increasing ODA levels, 35% supported a moderate increase, 28% thought the current level was appropriate and 13% wanted a decrease in ODA. In a more recent, 2007 survey, by Gallup on behalf of MOFAT,6 56% of people surveyed supported the broad statement „considering Korea‟s national power and international prestige, do you think the Korean government should increase its efforts to help maintain world peace or to provide development aid for poor countries?‟. Another 28% of people thought the current level of effort was sufficient and 15% wanted to reduce Korea‟s contribution in these areas. The public awareness figures suggest that Korea has established some broad awareness and support for ODA, but unsurprisingly considering Korea‟s relatively recent movement from being a recipient to being a donor, there is continued work to be done.

11. Increasing public awareness is one of KOICA‟s seven main objectives in its 2006 Annual Report. MOFAT and KOICA have undertaken various public awareness activities such as setting up a website, publishing a quarterly magazine entitled „International Development Co-operation‟, and holding an „ODA International Development Conference‟ that attracted an estimated 1 000 people during the day-long event. The government needs to continue to work to convince the public that Korea should engage further in the fight against global poverty, to enable it to make the hard choices between domestic and overseas spending and to scale up its ODA. At present there is no action plan

Korea memorandum to the DAC special review 2008, p 4.

Public survey by MOFE (now MOSF) and Gyunggi University. 26 October 2005.

Public survey on foreign policy by the MOFAT. 24 and 26 December 2007.

- 109 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

for public awareness, and Korea could build upon its commendable, but ad hoc, initiatives and develop a more strategic approach through such a plan.

12. Korean civil society organisations in the field of development assistance are active and highly knowledgeable. The sector is well co-ordinated and growing, and the government, which already has a generally open and frank relationship with civil society, would benefit from continued engagement on policy dialogue with this sector.

1.5

Recommendations



Korea could benefit from introducing overall legislation to govern its ODA. Any such legislation should clearly set out Korea‟s overall ODA objectives and should provide the legal basis for a consolidated aid system.



The government could consider creating a single entity with sole authority over development co-operation objectives, policy and strategy. This entity could develop a unified policy framework, which leads and applies to all parts of the ODA system.



While the introduction of the Comprehensive ODA Plan and the Mid-Term Strategy is a good beginning, they need to become integrated frameworks rather than compilations of individual strategies. Without such reform, the current structure could constrain efforts to manage increasing ODA.



Korea would benefit from a formal whole-of-government agreed public awareness strategy. It should be multi-year with key messages, targeted to specific audiences, and produced in partnership with civil society organisations. Also, it is understandable for emerging donors to need visibility to gain public support for their development co-operation efforts. But in the longer term, Korea will want to look at its visibility practice in the light of the Paris Declaration and other donors‟ behaviour where „flying the flag‟ through individual projects is being replaced by taking a share of the credit for the results achieved from collective interventions.



The government could further engage in dialogue with civil society organisations and draw upon their knowledge and expertise to inform development policy and practice.



The government could further engage in dialogue with civil society organisations and draw upon their knowledge and expertise to inform development policy and practice.

ODA volume, channels and allocations

2.1

Increasing aid - a big challenge

2.1

Increasing aid - a big challenge

13. In 2007, Korea‟s net ODA amounted to USD 673 million, representing 0.07% of its GNI. As shown in Figure 2 below, Korea‟s aid has been increasing steadily since the start of the decade (excluding an unusually high figure of USD 752 million (0.10% ODA/GNI) in 2005 due to exceptional assistance to Iraq and Afghanistan, and IDA and large Inter-American Development Bank subscriptions). Understandably, as an emerging donor, Korea‟s ODA volume remains low in comparison to the DAC average ODA/GNI ratio of 0.31% (with the lowest ODA/GNI ratio for a DAC member of 0.17%).

14. The government is determined to increase Korea‟s development assistance, and outlines this objective as one of 50 core tasks in its long-term planning manifesto, Vision 2030. The government set explicit targets, and committed to reaching 0.118% ODA/GNI by 2010 and 0.25% by 2015 (an estimated USD 3 billion+). In absolute terms, this is a huge challenge representing an increase in aid

- 110 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

six-fold in just seven years, and a particularly sharp and exponential increase from 2012 to 2015. Furthermore, there is a difference of opinion within government as to the robustness of these targets, with some Ministries viewing them as indicative only rather than firm commitments. Now, the new administration is reviewing Vision 2030 including the ODA scaling-up plan.

Figure 2. Korea's net ODA

800

Net Disbursements, USD Millions

800 700 600 500 400 300 200

100 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

700 600 500 400 300 200

100 0 2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total Net ODA

Bilateral Grants

Total Net ODA

Bilateral Grants

Bilateral Loans

Multilateral Contrib.

Bilateral Loans

Multilateral Contrib.

2006

15. Scaling up ODA can be difficult and there are no simple solutions. All donors are facing the same issue, and ultimately increasing ODA requires making hard political choices concerning increasing revenues and/or shifting spending from other areas. The Korean airline levy tax – i.e. every passenger leaving Korea must pay KRW 1 000 which is used for development purposes – is an innovative idea. There are few other innovative examples except for France allowing its municipalities to use 1% of the revenue they make from water and sanitation charges to be used for development assistance through decentralised co-operation (e.g. twinning arrangements).

16. Countries that have been most successful at scaling up ODA have been helped by: setting strong targets and commitments (e.g. the EU member states have made commitments and would lose considerable political face if they do not achieve these), having top–level and government wide support, and increasing public support through successful public awareness policies.

17. As a relatively new donor, Korea should set realistic, yet challenging targets. Once set, these targets should have whole-of-government support and be viewed as robust commitments, firmly incorporated in the government‟s budget planning.

18. Korea faces a special situation – its support to the northern part of the peninsula – that does not apply to other donors. This assistance is not formally reported to the DAC, and therefore cannot be officially recorded as ODA. Korea estimates that the share of assistance to the North that could be counted as ODA was USD 558 million in 20077. Although it is not counted as ODA, due to the special circumstances, the sizeable nature of the assistance is a sum that should be noted.8

In a letter dated 17 July 2008 Korea informed the DAC Chair that the USD 558 million delivered to North Korea consisted of: project aid (USD 123 million), technical co-operation (USD 5 million), developmental food aid (USD 131 million), humanitarian aid (USD 70 million), administrative costs

- 111 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

2.2

More bilateral aid and more grants

19. In 2006, Korean development assistance consisted of 83% bilateral aid and 17% multilateral aid. This was the highest ever proportion of bilateral aid, with multilateral aid decreasing from its 2238% levels of the previous five to six years. In absolute terms, with the exception of 2005 when large multilateral development bank subscriptions were made, it appears that multilateral aid remains flat and bilateral aid is increasing.

20. A particularity of the Korean system is the large use of concessional loans. In 2006 loans constituted 31% of ODA and grants 69%, a high figure compared to most other DAC donors. Nearly all DAC donors‟ aid portfolios consist almost entirely of grants, with only three DAC donors using loans to any real extent. Of these three, two have a loan component of around 10% of their aid portfolios, and only one uses loans to any significant degree. Korea‟s enthusiasm for loans can partly be explained by its own positive experience as a recipient of aid loans during its development process, and the profoundly held belief that this instrument imposes essential fiscal discipline on the recipient country.

21. Undoubtedly, loans continue to be a valid tool for development in the right circumstances, but Korea should take note of the global efforts to reduce debt and ensure debt sustainability – a precondition for development. It is of concern to see that in 2006, loans made up 60% of Korean bilateral aid to least developed countries (LDCs) and grants 40%, whereas the figure for lower middle income countries (LMICs) is 26% loans and 74% grants, and upper middle income countries (UMICs) receive only grants. Generally, due to debt sustainability issues, the opposite would be expected, with loans used more in MICs and less in LDCs.

22. The DAC Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid states that official development assistance to LDCs “should essentially be in the form of grants, and as a minimum, the average grant element of all commitments from a given donor should either be at least 86% to each Least Developed Country over a period of three years, or at least 90% annually” as a group. All DAC members have accepted the Recommendation and all currently comply with this provision. Korea‟s present aid programme would not meet either of the alternative tests under the provision, so it is likely that DAC members would wish to know how Korea might address this.9 Loans have the further drawback that repayments may eventually offset ODA increases in net ODA. Therefore a heavy reliance on loans requires robust planning to ensure that repayments are fully taken into account in ODA scaling-up strategies.

(USD 2 million), and loans by the government (USD 227 million). This information will be included in the annual Development Co-operation Report and elsewhere, as appropriate.

However, as assistance to the North is not formally reported, it is not verified by the DAC in terms of being ODA eligible, measurable and evaluated in terms of development effectiveness.

The Recommendation also states that “Members should endeavour fully to maintain or achieve as soon as possible an average grant element in their ODA commitments of at least 86 per cent” and that “Countries whose ODA commitments as a percentage of GNP [GNI] are significantly below the DAC average will not be considered as having met this terms target”. Korea‟s average grant element for 2005-6 was 89%, so its current programme already meets the first part of this overall terms target. However, Korea‟s ODA as a percentage of GNI is significantly below the 2006 DAC average of 0.32%, meaning that it would not meet the second part of the target. Three existing DAC members - Greece, Italy and the United States – also did not meet the second part of this target in 2006, though not by as wide a margin as Korea. Korea‟s position and intentions with regard to this terms target would also be of interest to DAC members.

- 112 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

23. There is debate within the Korean government about the merits and appropriateness of loans, but mixed messages emanate from different parts of the system. In its 2006 Annual Report, KOICA states that the government is planning to increase the amount of grant aid, 10 both in relative and absolute terms, but this is a view not necessarily agreed and accepted by all parts of the Korean government. The ongoing dispute over the ratio of loans and grants in Korea's aid portfolio is partly a consequence of the two pillar system, and could distract from constructing a single vision for Korea‟s development co-operation.

2.3

Increasing the focus on LDCs and other low income countries

24. Data show that Korean bilateral aid to LDCs and other low income countries was 42% in 2006, compared to a DAC average of 56% (Table 1). Korea may want to look at how to increase this figure, but also to ensure that it applies suitable policies and instruments in LDCs and other lowincome countries. As noted above, loans are generally less appropriate in these countries, where debt sustainability is an issue. Overall, Korea should be mindful that its development co-operation maintains a focus on poverty reduction and contributes to the MDGs, by prioritising LDCs and lowincome countries and using appropriate aid instruments.

Table 1. Bilateral ODA by region and income groups

KOICA 2006 Annual Report, President‟s message. Page 5.

- 113 -

KOICA 2006 Annual Report, President‟s message. Page 5.

- 113 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

2.4

Maintaining a credible level of bilateral ODA to priority countries

25. In 2006, Korea disbursed 49% of its bilateral aid to Asia, 20% to the Middle-East, 14% to Africa, 9% to Europe and 7% to the Americas (Table 1). Asia is expected to remain the largest recipient of Korean aid, but Korea also committed to increasing aid to Africa three-fold by 2008 under its Initiative for Africa Development announced in March 2006.

26. The Asia focus is logical considering Korea‟s geographical position and development experience. The intention to increase activities in Africa is understandable, but in an era when the division of labour and increased co-ordination are paramount, it would be prudent for Korea to consider carefully how and where it expands in Africa. Spreading itself too thinly across too many countries, initiating small, stand alone activities would likely result in little developmental impact. Korea might also like to consider how involvement in Latin America fits with its general aid objectives.

27. There is some lack of clarity in how to identify partner countries and objectives. The laws establishing KOICA and EDCF do not offer objectives for ODA in operational terms, and MOFAT and MOSF do not have operational guidelines on the criteria for allocating ODA. Also there is no overall national development policy strategy nor policy papers declaring objectives or principles in operational terms. It would be helpful if the criteria for selecting partner countries were transparent, understood and applied across the board. There is also confusion amongst MOFAT and MOSF regarding the total number of partner countries (see below). There should be a single list of partner countries for Korean aid determined by the overall policy.

28. Nevertheless, Korea is taking the positive step of concentrating and focusing its aid geographically. It has pledged to reduce its number of partner countries from 127 to 58, and within this smaller number, to focus on „priority‟ partner countries. MOFAT/KOICA have identified 19 priority countries to receive grant aid, and separately MOSF/EDCF have identified 11 priority countries to receive loans. Since 7 of these are in common, there is a total of 23 priority partners (Table 2 below).

29. MOFAT and MOSF have each introduced separate mid-term Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) (section 3.1 for more detail) for these 23 priority countries11 which run from 2008-10, and are a good start to providing a guideline for programme/project design and a standard for evaluation.

Table 2. Priority partner countries

Region (total 23) Asia (9 countries)

MOFAT/KOICA priority partners (19 countries) Vietnam, Laos, Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Mongolia

Africa (6 countries)

Egypt, Tanzania, Senegal, Ethiopia, Nigeria Guatemala, Peru, Paraguay

Central and South America (4 countries) Middle East (2 countries) Central Asia, Europe and CIS (2 countries)

Iraq Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan

MOSF/EDCF priority partners (11 countries) Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Cambodia Angola

Region (total 23) Asia (9 countries)

MOFAT/KOICA priority partners (19 countries) Vietnam, Laos, Indonesia, Philippines, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Mongolia

Africa (6 countries)

Guatemala, Colombia

Central and South America (4 countries) Middle East (2 countries) Central Asia, Europe and CIS (2 countries)

Egypt, Tanzania, Senegal, Ethiopia, Nigeria Guatemala, Peru, Paraguay

Yemen

Note: Countries in bold receive both KOICA and EDCF assistance.

For each of the seven partner countries where MOFAT/KOICA and MOSF/EDCF are both active there are two separate Country Assistance Strategies.

- 114 -

Iraq Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan

MOSF/EDCF priority partners (11 countries) Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Cambodia Angola Guatemala, Colombia Yemen

Note: Countries in bold receive both KOICA and EDCF assistance.

For each of the seven partner countries where MOFAT/KOICA and MOSF/EDCF are both active there are two separate Country Assistance Strategies.

- 114 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

30. In 2005-6, Korea disbursed 67% of its gross bilateral aid to its top 10 recipient countries, which is above the DAC average of 62%. Korea‟s top aid beneficiaries are Iraq, which receives 25% of all Korean bilateral aid, followed by Sri Lanka and Bangladesh with 7% each.

2.5

Ensuring a focus on a limited number of sectors

31. Other donors are making significant efforts to focus on fewer sectors partly as a result of efforts to increase the „division of labour‟ amongst themselves and to make aid more effective. Korea asserts that it is increasing the sector concentration of aid, and in the Mid-Term ODA Strategy commits to focusing on seven sectors: education, health, governance, rural development, information and communication technology, industry and energy, and environment and gender. The awareness of the need to concentrate is positive but the sectors as defined are quite broad. This permits Korea to engage in a wide spectrum of activities in any given country. Korea could seek to determine its comparative advantages and focus in real terms, limiting itself where possible to two or three sectors in each partner country and in co-ordination with other donors.

2.6

Multilateral aid and other aid modalities

32. In 2006, Korea disbursed 17% of its aid through multilateral channels, below the DAC average of 26%, and running at a relatively flat level through the first half of the decade (aside from a spike in 2005 due to exceptional subscriptions). However, Korea envisages significant absolute increases from USD 79 million in 2006 to USD 210 million in 2007 and USD 334 million in 2008. With sizeable scaling up plans on the longer-term horizon, it can be expected that Korea will continue to expand the use of multilateral organisations – often a good conduit for managing rapid aid increases. Roughly half of Korea‟s multilateral aid goes through multilateral development banks and just under half through United Nations organisations (60% of this to seven UN agencies, with the World Health Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation and United Nations Development Programme foremost beneficiaries). In efforts to increase effective engagement with the multilaterals, Korea will be an observer in the Multilateral Organisations Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN) from 2008.

33. The responsibility for managing much of the multilateral aid portfolio is split between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Ministry of Strategy and Finance. MOFAT is in charge of contributions to international organisations such as the UN, while MOSF is responsible for subscriptions and contributions to multilateral development banks. But in total, over 20 ministries are making contributions or subscriptions to an estimated 80 international organisations. Korea is currently introducing a guideline for co-operation with multilateral institutions, and would benefit from developing a coherent over-arching strategy for interaction with multilaterals. Although amongst other donors, it is not unusual for the responsibility for multilateral aid to be split, the spread of funding across more than 20 different ministries is exceptional and could be addressed.

34. Channelling aid through multilaterals is one way to efficiently manage a rapid increase of aid; however, Korea may also want to explore the use of other, innovative aid modalities. At present, budget support is rarely used, but Korea is tentatively considering engaging in Sector Wide Approaches (SWAps), and in the future may also want to consider the use of general budget support. It may also want to consider further pooled funding, (it already does some, a good example being the Central Emergency Response Fund, section 5.1) and other effective mechanisms such as partnerships with other donors through delegated co-operation (section 4).

- 115 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

2.7

Cross-cutting issues

35. Korea recognises that it puts limited emphasis on cross-cutting issues, and has pledged to address this. There is a focus sector entitled „environment and gender‟ but according to Korean figures, only 2.5 % of ODA goes towards projects with an environmental content, while gender receives insignificant funding. As it builds a more sophisticated aid programme, Korea will want to give more attention to these, and other important cross-cutting issues, such as human rights and governance. It will also want to consider how to mainstream them throughout Korean programmes and projects.

2.8

Private sector

36. Korea has a strong interest in involving the private sector in its development co-operation activities. The following gives some experiences of other donors which Korea could consider in developing its approach to working in this area. As the major contributor to growth and the creation of more and better jobs, development of private sector activity in developing countries is central to donors‟ efforts to substantially and sustainably reduce poverty. For many years, donors approached development of the private sector by supporting specific types of firms considered important for the poor (e.g. certain sizes or sectors), sometimes through firm-to-firm linkages with enterprises in their own country. Experience has shown shortcomings in the use of such concessional finance to end users in the private sector, which typically create market distortions and may often be unsustainable, once the subsidy stops. Thus, the focus has often been on firms, rather than market outcomes, and there has been insufficient recognition of how policies need to reflect better the interests of all parts of society, notably those of the poor who often have little voice and are excluded from decision-making processes.

37. The market-based approach that many donors (e.g. Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom) are now pursuing puts the focus on improving the supply-side response to new or expanding opportunities in both the formal and informal economies, especially in sectors where poor men and women are economically active and regions where the poor live. Interventions aim to address the specific, local constraints encountered by, for example, expanding access to financial services or productive resources such as land and technical knowledge. ODA can also be used to improve the environment for private sector activity by, for example, supporting required policy and institutional reforms or helping to expand access to affordable and maintained infrastructure.

2.9

Recommendations



The commitment made at the highest level to increasing development assistance – by the President in his inaugural speech – is positive, as are the targets in the government‟s Vision 2030 to scale-up to 0.118% ODA/GNI by 2011 and 0.25% by 2015. It would be useful to have these targets widely publicised and formally committed to. Delivering on these targets will improve aid predictability for Korea and its partners.



All DAC members comply with the DAC Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid, which sets a minimum average grant level that donors‟ portfolios to LDCs should contain. In time, Korea will want to be clear how it plans to meet this recommendation.



There is a need for Korea to integrate grants and concessional loans to support one clear strategy overall and at the country level; the use of instruments should be driven by objectives and expected development outcomes.



The increasing geographic focus of Korea‟s aid is welcome. As Korea scales up it should stay focused, and be aware that 59 partner countries/23 priority countries remains relatively



The increasing geographic focus of Korea‟s aid is welcome. As Korea scales up it should stay focused, and be aware that 59 partner countries/23 priority countries remains relatively

- 116 -



DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

high compared to DAC members with similar levels of ODA. It should create a single list of partner countries consistent with overall policy and objectives.

high compared to DAC members with similar levels of ODA. It should create a single list of partner countries consistent with overall policy and objectives. 

Korea could develop an over-arching strategy for all multilateral aid, spanning the MDBs, UN and other international organisations, assessing the contribution that each organisation can make to Korea‟s development objectives. It should be driven by, and fit within, the overall aid strategy, and it should complement and reinforce bilateral aid. Further, it would be advisable to reduce significantly the number of organisations (80) that are funded.

Organisation and management of Korean development co-operation

3.1

The four main actors (MOFAT, KOICA, MOSF and EDCF)

3.1

The four main actors (MOFAT, KOICA, MOSF and EDCF)

38. The Korean development co-operation system comprises four main actors. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MOFAT) is responsible for Korea‟s bilateral grant aid policy, which is implemented by the Korea International Co-operation Agency (KOICA). The Ministry of Strategy and Finance (MOSF) is responsible for concessional loan policy, which is implemented by the Korea Eximbank‟s Economic Development and Co-operation Fund (EDCF). Both MOFAT and MOSF have shared responsibility for part of Korea‟s multilateral aid (Figure 1 for a reminder of the aid architecture).

39. MOFAT formulates short-term and long-term bilateral grant aid strategies and is the main channel for co-operation with the OECD/DAC. In August 2007, MOFAT‟s bilateral aid activities were unified under a single, newly created Bureau for Development Co-operation, comprising the Development Policy Division, the Development Co-operation Division and the Humanitarian Assistance Division. This prudent effort to consolidate within the Ministry is beginning to add value, not least in the Bureau‟s growing awareness of and ability to take an overall perspective on the systemic challenges facing Korean development co-operation.

40. KOICA is under the supervision of MOFAT and administers the Korean government‟s grant aid and technical co-operation programmes. KOICA collects information and identifies projects, often submitted by the partner country. It reviews them based on partners national poverty reduction plans, Korean comparative advantage, and their compatibility with Korea‟s Mid-term ODA Strategy and the Korean Country Assistance Strategy for that country. KOICA is involved in feasibility studies, engaging in policy dialogue, concluding agreements with partner countries, and designing and implementing projects directly, or through outsourcing, as well as through dispatching experts and oversees volunteers.

41. KOICA‟s headquarters office comprises three policy related offices and seven operational divisions (organigramme in Annex A). KOICA also has 22 representation offices in 21 partner countries to implement at the field level.

42. MOSF establishes the annual budget and national fiscal management plan to support public expenditure for national development activities. It is also responsible, through the Development Co-operation Division, for formulating policy for the concessional loan part of Korean ODA, and for managing and supervising the Korea Eximbank‟s execution of the EDCF. It provides a small amount of grant aid to conduct feasibility studies prior to the implementation of EDCF assistance. Furthermore, the MOSF‟s International Financial Institutions Division is in charge of Korea‟s communication, policies, contributions and subscriptions to the Multilateral Development Banks.

- 117 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

43. The Korea Eximbank operates and administers the EDCF, which is the concessional loan arm of the Korean development co-operation system. The EDCF principally offers development project loans and equipment loans to partner countries which are determined by MOSF though the deliberations of its management board, the Fund Management Council (Annex A for an organigramme of the operating system of the EDCF). The EDCF appraises the feasibility of projects and loan applications, and after the MOSF has then determined the amount, terms and conditions of the loans, the EDCF enters into the loan agreement with the partner country.

44. As well as the four principal actors above, a further estimated 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities, are involved in providing grant aid, mainly in the form of technical co-operation (i.e. the dispatch of experts and inviting people from developing countries to train in Korea).

3.2 The importance of good co-ordination and co-operation between all ministries and agencies

45. With four main actors and a further estimated 30 other ministries, agencies and municipalities with separate aid portfolios, the Korean system is fragmented. Different organisations design and implement separate assistance operations in each partner country, and there is a lack of coordination and therefore some inefficiency. A fragmented approach also increases demands on overstretched partner governments.

46. Korea has taken positive steps to introduce strategic thinking, notably with the introduction of the mid-term Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) for the priority countries. The CASs run from 2008 to 2010, and will be updated and modified. They include an overview of the political, economic and social situation in a given country, and an assessment of the partner government‟s development plans. They also include a summary of other donors‟ activities in the country, and then set out Korea‟s current strategy as well as its planned activities and evaluation process. Korea should be applauded for introducing the CASs which are a good effort to design an overall plan for a particular agency (KOICA or EDCF) in a partner country and are comprehensive and clear. However, KOICA and EDCF each produce a separate CAS for a given country, and therefore the next step is for the ministries to work together and produce a single, integrated CAS for countries in which they are both present. Furthermore, the master-plan Integrated Country Assistance Strategy for 2008-10 which outlines Korean aims in all the priority countries is at present a compilation of separate Korean interventions and would be more useful if it were a collectively designed strategic action plan.

47. There is some inter-ministerial co-ordination through the Prime Minister led Committee for International Development Co-operation (comprising 15 ministers and 6 civil society representatives), but beyond this, as yet there is little attention given to Policy Coherence for Development (PCD). There is awareness of PCD by officials in MOFAT and KOICA, but Korea would benefit from more substantive efforts on taking account of the effect of other policies on economic growth in developing countries. As its aid grows, this is another issue that Korea will want to address.

3.3

Ensuring the appropriate staff to manage an increasing aid budget

48. As Korea increases its aid, it will need an appropriate number of staff with relevant development co-operation skills and experience. At present the total number of Korean ministry and agency staff working on development assistance is an estimated 33512 (Table 3). Of these, 213 are employed by KOICA and the EDCF section of Eximbank consists of 65 staff.

Total staff number for MOFAT, MOSF, KOICA and EDCF – excluding other ministries.

- 118 -

Ensuring the appropriate staff to manage an increasing aid budget

Total staff number for MOFAT, MOSF, KOICA and EDCF – excluding other ministries.

- 118 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

49. Ensuring the appropriate number of staff does not imply that more staff is necessarily required. In fact, increased co-ordination and consolidation within the Korean system could lead to efficiencies and staff savings in some areas allowing for a redistribution of assets that could be put to better use in other areas. In the future, there will be a continued need to ensure staff are specifically equipped and trained in development co-operation skills. Furthermore, in some parts of the system, notably KOICA, measures are required to tackle high staff turnover, and to increase retention rates.

50. Also on the horizon is the issue of decentralisation. Like many donors, and as part of its Paris Declaration commitments, Korea has taken some steps to move its operations closer to the realities of the field by decentralising. Currently, 20% of KOICA‟s staff are based in partner countries, whereas the figure for EDCF is only 7%.

Table 3. Staff numbers 2007

Ministry/Agency Ministry of Foreign Affairs staff working on development co-operation (Seoul)

Numbers of staff 35

Ministry/Agency Ministry of Foreign Affairs staff working on development co-operation (Seoul)

Ministry of Strategy and Finance staff working on development co-operation (Seoul)

KOICA total staff

213

KOICA total staff

213

(KOICA headquarters staff)

(171)

(KOICA field staff)

(KOICA headquarters staff)

(42)

EDCF

(60)

(EDCF field staff)

335

(5)

Total

Source: Figures provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Monitoring and evaluation

(EDCF headquarters staff)

(5)

Total

(42)

EDCF

(60)

(EDCF field staff)

(171)

(KOICA field staff)

(EDCF headquarters staff)

3.4

Numbers of staff 35

335

Source: Figures provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

3.4

Monitoring and evaluation

51. The monitoring and evaluation of Korea‟s development co-operation activities are carried out by the implementing agencies (KOICA and Eximbank‟s EDCF), which have similar procedures.

52. KOICA established an evaluation office in 1998, which reports directly to the President, and also produced project evaluation regulations in 2006. The project implementation teams themselves conduct the mid-term and project completion evaluations, whereas ex-post evaluations are carried out between six months to three years after project completion by the evaluation office. Similarly, project completion monitoring for EDCF loans is conducted by the project management units themselves, and ex-post evaluation is carried out two to three years after completion by an „evaluation unit‟. The evaluation unit is set-up specifically for this purpose and either consists of non-project related staff, or, for large projects, staff from beyond the EDCF group. Some evaluation reports are available to the public and published on the agencies‟ websites.

53. In 2008 the government intends to establish a common set of evaluation guidelines to apply across all organisations/agencies. These guidelines need to help build a robust independent evaluation culture in line with international best practice. Furthermore, KOICA and EDCF should clearly articulate how evaluation results are used to shape future development co-operation activities.

- 119 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

3.5

Recommendations



With a less fragmented aid system, and more unified strategies, particularly at the country level, the coherence, efficiency and potential impact of Korean development activities could be increased. Country Assistance Strategies should be used as active management tools to develop integrated implementation plans for all Korean aid agencies operating in a country.



As Korea scales up its ODA it will want to professionalise its staff further and attract and retain quality staff. Greater co-ordination and consolidation could lead to efficiency gains – working „smarter‟ not „harder‟.



Korea would benefit from building a strong independent evaluation culture in line with international standards. This could include improving ongoing monitoring during project implementation, improving ex-post evaluation, and integrating lessons from evaluations into future programmes. Evaluations could consistently be made public in order to improve accountability.



Aid effectiveness

4.1

Committed to the aid effectiveness agenda

4.1

Committed to the aid effectiveness agenda

54. Korea is committed to increasing the effectiveness of its aid, and has taken the positive step of signing the Paris Declaration and participating in the monitoring survey in 2006 – the only nonDAC donor country to do so substantially. Although Korea‟s 2006 response to the survey only covered 3 countries representing 4% of its programmed aid, it demonstrates good intent, and Korea is extending monitoring to a more representative sample of 13 countries in the 2008 survey.

4.2

Ownership and alignment

55. Korea has begun engaging in more extensive dialogue with partner countries and discusses the Mid-Term Strategy and Country Assistance Strategies with partners. These interactions could be strengthened by aligning the CASs fully with partners development priorities, pursuing joint ownership, and fitting within partners‟ own country strategic plans.

Table 4. Indicators on Aid Effectiveness for Korea

2005 baseline ratio for Korea 12%

Indicators (3-8 alignment, 9-10 harmonisation) 3 4 5a 5b 6 7 8 9 10a 10b Source:

Aid flows are aligned on national priorities Strengthen capacity by coordinated support Use of country public financial management systems Use of country procurement systems Avoid parallel implementation structures Aid is more predictable Aid is untied Use of common arrangement or procedures Joint mission Joint country analytical work

2010 Targets

2005 global baseline (i.e. weighted average of all DAC donors) 88%

94%

74%

48%

50%

45%

40%

[8 0 % ]

39%

[80%]

12% -0%

70% 75% 43%

87% Progress over time 66%

7 8 9

0% --

18% 42%

40% 66%

10a 10b

OECD DAC Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration: overview of results May 2007.

- 120 -

2005 baseline ratio for Korea 12%

Indicators (3-8 alignment, 9-10 harmonisation)

Source:

2010 Targets

2005 global baseline (i.e. weighted average of all DAC donors) 88%

94%

74%

48%

50%

45%

40%

[8 0 % ]

39%

[80%]

12% -0%

70% 75% 43%

87% Progress over time 66%

0% --

18% 42%

40% 66%

OECD DAC Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration: overview of results May 2007.

- 120 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

56. Despite the monitoring survey‟s limited sample, it does give some indication of Korea‟s progress and challenges on aligning and harmonising its aid (Table 4). Indicator 3, which measures the extent to which aid flows are aligned to countries‟ national priorities is low at 12% compared to a DAC average of 88% and a target of 94%. But Korea scores well on co-ordinating its technical co-operation, 74% compared to a 48% average (indicator 4), and on the use of public financial management systems (indicator 5a). On the remaining alignment indicators, Korea has room for improvement, as it does not use country procurement systems (indicator 5b), has a low aid predictability score (indicator 7), and its aid is highly tied (section 4.3 below).

4.3

A need to untie bilateral aid

57. The tying status of aid has long been considered a key test of donors' commitment to coherent policies and effective aid delivery, and partner countries have consistently identified the practice of tying as one of the principal procedures that undermine aid effectiveness. It is clearly documented that tying aid raises the cost of many goods, services and works by 15% to 30% on average. These percentages represent a conservative estimate of the real costs of tied aid, since they do not incorporate the indirect costs of tying, which include often higher transaction costs for recipients. Furthermore, tied aid is often, at least, partially guided by commercial considerations, which do not necessarily match local needs and priorities.

58. In line with these arguments, a large number of DAC Members have either fully untied their bilateral aid programmes, e.g. Australia, Luxembourg, Norway, Netherlands, Ireland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom or almost completely untied, e.g. Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Japan, and Switzerland. As a consequence, the proportion of financial aid from DAC members recorded as untied has increased appreciably – from 42.5% in 2002 to 53.0% in 2006.

59. An estimated 98% of Korean bilateral aid is either tied or partially tied (Table 5) – an extremely high proportion, and at odds with other DAC donors. The government is well aware that it needs to untie its bilateral aid to LDCs – partly in order to be considered for DAC membership. The previous government prepared a Roadmap to Untying which may be subject to change, but currently applies and foresees a gradual reduction in untying to meet the 2001 DAC Recommendation on Untying Official Development Assistance13 to the least developed countries by 2015.

60. There is a need for debate, firstly across government, and secondly with the general public and the business sector, about the development benefits of untying aid, and the need to expose Korean companies to competition for aid funded procurement. The government should make the case that untying will be good for increasing the competitiveness of Korean firms in the longer term and will allow reciprocal access to much larger markets (e.g. EU reciprocity on untied aid).

Table 5. Tying status of bilateral ODA commitments 2004-06 (USD)

Total bilateral commitments of which:

untied partially untied tied

2004 410

2005 555

2006 525

17 62 331

14 89 452

10 98 417

Total bilateral commitments of which:

Excludes technical co-operation and administrative costs.

Excludes free-standing technical co-operation and food aid.

- 121 -

untied partially untied tied

2004 410

2005 555

2006 525

17 62 331

14 89 452

10 98 417

Excludes technical co-operation and administrative costs.

Excludes free-standing technical co-operation and food aid.

- 121 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

61. Korea should progressively increase the proportion of its untied aid in its future development assistance with the aim of meeting the DAC requirement within a reasonable timeframe of becoming a DAC member. Korea should not under-estimate the importance that the DAC gives to abiding by the recommendation – a necessary condition for DAC membership.14

4.4

Harmonisation

62. Korea recognises that at present it does not co-ordinate nor co-operate extensively with other donors. This is reflected in the monitoring survey which shows that Korea does not use common arrangement or procedures (indicator 9), undertake joint missions (indicator 10a), or conduct joint country analytical work (indicator 10b). The government has stated that in the future it will „actively participate in donor co-ordination meetings and undertake joint projects’ 15 and has begun bilateral policy dialogues with other donors such as Japan and the United Kingdom.

4.5

Recommendations



Korea should be commended for signing the Paris Declaration and for taking part in the monitoring survey. Korea is advised to continue to make progress on aligning its aid with partner countries‟ national systems. It is also encouraged to co-ordinate and harmonise with other donors, including through the use of joint projects and delegated co-operation, especially with donors in areas where Korea does not have experience or presence.



Korea is aware that it needs to untie its aid further. The „Roadmap on Untying‟ is a positive start, but significant progress is required, and the government should be mindful that it must fully comply with the DAC recommendation on untying within a reasonable timeframe after it joins the DAC.



Humanitarian action

5.1

Humanitarian policy and practice

5.1

Humanitarian policy and practice

63. Korea is not a signatory to the Principles and Good Practices of Humanitarian Donorship (the Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative), which are the usual basis for assessing humanitarian components of aid programs within the DAC peer review process. Nevertheless, this assessment uses the GHD principles and good practices as de facto benchmarks for the Korean humanitarian action program.

64. Currently, Korea does not have a humanitarian action policy, but intends to address this deficit. The forthcoming policy is expected to include a commitment to the humanitarian aid principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence. It also represents an ideal opportunity for Korea to formally endorse and embrace the GHD principles and practices. The policy should also outline how Korea will link humanitarian objectives (including prevention, preparedness and recovery) with broader development objectives.

Furthermore, Korea is a Participant to the Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits. The DAC Secretariat has consulted with the Export Credit Division of the OECD‟s Trade and Agriculture Directorate, which has advised that Korea notifies relevant tied aid offers in accordance with Chapter 4 of the Arrangement, and participates in any resulting consultations. The Export Credit Division is not aware of any issue in regard to Korea‟s participation in the arrangement that would impede its application to the DAC.

Korea memorandum to the DAC special review. Page 38.

- 122 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

65. In recent years, Korea has expanded humanitarian aid efforts. Expenditure has grown from 1% of gross bilateral ODA (USD 4 million) in 2003, to 5% of gross bilateral ODA (USD 23 million) in 2006 – slightly below the DAC average of 6%. There has also been organisational reform, with a Humanitarian Aid Division created within the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Trade in 2007, an overhaul of the rapid response machinery and an Overseas Emergency Relief Act enacted in 2007. The Act underpins the government‟s ability to provide emergency assistance and to promote greater co-operation with the international community in disaster relief. Furthermore, a recently published emergency relief manual provides operational guidance.

66. Korea‟s main bilateral interventions have been in large-scale natural disasters in Asia, to which it has responded by sending goods and funds as well as professional relief workers and volunteers. Major humanitarian interventions include responding to the Bam earthquake in 2003, the South Asian Tsunami in 2004, the Pakistan earthquake in 2005, the landslides in the Philippines and the Yogyakarta earthquake in 2006. At present, there is limited evidence of how Korea evaluates these interventions, and how findings are being used to inform future interventions. It has also begun to work through multilateral channels, funding the humanitarian UN agencies directly, and should be commended for contributing to UN Inter-Agency Consolidated Appeals, and the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF). Funding to the CERF was USD 5 million in 2006, USD 1.5 million in 2007 and USD 2 million has been pledged for 2008. As Korean ODA grows, Korea could also consider how it could play a stronger role in increasing its support to multilateral humanitarian assistance efforts, in order to extend its reach to areas of the world beyond Asia.

67. MOFAT and KOICA are discussing with the Ministry of Defence how to make appropriate use of military assets in humanitarian crises. This dialogue should ensure that deployment of Korean military assets conforms to international guidelines specified under the GHD Initiative, including the 1994 Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief and the 2003 Guidelines on the Use of Military and Civil Defence Assets to Support United Nations Humanitarian Activities in Complex Emergencies.16

5.2

Recommendations



The new policy on humanitarian aid should contain an explicit commitment to the Good Humanitarian Donorship principles and good practices, including the core principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality, and independence.



Korea is commended for increasing humanitarian aid spending; as it scales up, and in line with the provisions of the Overseas Emergency Relief Act, it should ensure that its humanitarian activities are needs-based, not driven by visibility objectives, and are delivered within the framework of a coordinated international response. It should look to the experience of other donors who often predominantly use multilateral and pooled funding channels, rather than develop parallel bilateral delivery systems.



Both are known as the „Oslo Guidelines‟.

- 123 -

Both are known as the „Oslo Guidelines‟.

- 123 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

ANNEX A

ORGANISATION CHARTS

Figure A.1. Organisation Chart - KOICA

President

Auditor

Assistant to the President

Office of the Auditor

Auditor

Assistant to the President

Office of the Auditor

• Overseas Offices Vice President

Vice President

• Overseas Offices Vice President

Policy Planning, Research & International Organization Office

Evaluation Office

Public Relations Office

Vice President

• Managing Director for Personal Affairs Directly under the Vice President

Directly under the Vice President

Planning & Management Department

Regional Department

• Health Team • Education Team • Environment & Gender Team

• Information & Communication Technology Team • Rural Development Team • Governance Team • Industry & Energy Team • Planning & Budget Team • Administrative & Legal Affairs Team • Procurement Team • Accounting Team • General Affairs Team • Information Management Team

• Policy Planning Team • Regional Team I • Regional Team II • Non-Governmental Organization Team

Vice President

• Managing Director for Personal Affairs Directly under the Vice President

Directly under the Vice President

Planning & Management Department

Regional Department

• Health Team • Education Team • Environment & Gender Team

• Policy Planning Team • Regional Team I • Regional Team II • Non-Governmental Organization Team

Human Resources Development Department

• Training Team I • Training Team II • Training Management Team

Human Resources Development Department

• Training Team I • Training Team II • Training Management Team

Overseas Volunteers Department

• Overseas Volunteers Planning Team • Overseas Volunteers Team I • Overseas Volunteers Team II

Overseas Volunteers Department

• Overseas Volunteers Planning Team • Overseas Volunteers Team I • Overseas Volunteers Team II

Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Department

• Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Team I • Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Team II • Humanitarian Aid Team

- 124 -

Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Department

• Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Team I • Disaster Relief & Reconstruction Team II • Humanitarian Aid Team

- 124 -

DAC SPECIAL REVIEW OF KOREA

Figure A.1. Co-operation System of EDCF

Fund Management Council a) (Deliberation Council)

• Deliberation or principal policies concerning operation and management • Deliberation on EDCF operational programs and review of financial statements • Determination of assistance policy for important projects • Other matters deemed necessary

Other Relevant Ministries

Ministry of Finance and Economy (Operating Body) • Drafting EDCF operational programs and financial statements • Preparing principal policies concerning operation and management • Selection of projects under considering for assistance • Determination of assistance policy • Proposal presentation to the Fund Management Council

The Export-Import Bank of Korea (Executing Agency) • EDCF operation and management • Dispatch of appraisal mission • Preparing appraisal reports • Loan negotiations • Execution of loan agreements • Loan disbursements • Collection of repayment of principal and interest thereon • Project supervision • Ex-post evaluation • Other advisory services

- 125 -

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Official Window)

• Acceptance of loan requests • Notification of assistance policies • Execution of inter-governmental agreements • liaison

Note: a) Members of the Fund Management Council: The Minister of Finance and Economy (Chairman); the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade; the Minister of Science and Technology; the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry; the Minster of Commerce, Industry and Energy; the Minster of Information and Communications; the Minister of Health and Welfare; the Minster of Construction and Transportation; the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries; the Minister of Planning and Budget; the Chief Economic Secretary of the Presidential Secretariat; the Deputy Director of the National Intelligence Service; the Minister of the Office for Government Policy Coordination; the Chairman and President of the Export-Import Bank of Korea; and the President of the Korea International Cooperation Agency.

Other Relevant Ministries

- 125 -

Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Official Window)

• Acceptance of loan requests • Notification of assistance policies • Execution of inter-governmental agreements • liaison

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[2008DAC Special Peer Review]

OECD/DAC Special Peer Review

한국의 OECD/DAC 가입을 위한

DAC 특별심사

(KOICA 국제개발협력2008년 3호)

- 129 -

- 130 -

- 131 -

- 132 -

- 133 -

- 134 -

- 135 -

- 136 -

- 137 -

- 138 -

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[시민사회]

2012년 ODA정책 문제점과

개선 방향에 관한 의견서

(참여연대)

2012. 01. 10 | 제2012-01호

2012년 ODA정책의 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 의견서

발행

참여연대

담당

차은하 간사

정책위원회

- 141 -

발행

참여연대

담당

차은하 간사

정책위원회

- 141 -

차례

요약

한국

정책 문제점과 개선 방향

한국

제언

참고자료

참여연대 보고서 제

호

- 142 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향

참여연대 보고서 제

호

- 142 -

요약

년

월에 열린

펴보면 한국의

차 국제개발협력위원회에서 논의된 내용이나 확정 발표된 정책방향을 살

년

정책은 그 동안 꾸준히 제기되었던 고질적인 문제를 그다지 개선하지 못

했을 뿐만 아니라

펴보면 한국의

의 근본적인 목적인 빈곤타파와 지속가능한 성장 에 부합하고 있다고

정책위원회는 이 같은 정책방향에 대해 우려를 표하며 관련 정책의 문제점과

참여연대

정책의 개선과 질적 성장을 위한 정

l 참여연대는

정책의 문제점과 개선 방향을 다음과 같이 제시하고자 한다

국제개발협력위원회는 현실적으로 원조 체계의 이원화 집행 분절화 문제를 조정 심의하는

야함

한국의 원조 규모 및 유상 원조 비율은

평균에도 못 미침 한국의 경제력에 비추어

기획재정부가 유상원조를 해외시장 창출 등 대외경제정책을 지원하기 위한 수단으로 오용

규제방안 없이 기업 등 민간주도 개발협력 사업 확대는

한국의 원조 규모 및 유상 원조 비율은

평균에도 못 미침 한국의 경제력에 비추어

원조 규모는 보다 확대되어야 하고 유상원조 비율을 적극적으로 줄여 가야 함 기획재정부가 유상원조를 해외시장 창출 등 대외경제정책을 지원하기 위한 수단으로 오용 할 우려가 상당히 높음 기재부가 유상원조 주관기관으로 적합한지 재검토가 필요함

의 공공성을 훼손할 수 있음

규제방안 없이 기업 등 민간주도 개발협력 사업 확대는

의 공공성을 훼손할 수 있음

정부는 민관협력을 강화하기 위한 전제조건으로 민간 기업들이 국제 인권조약 등 국제규범

을 준수하도록 하고 수원국 주민에게 피해를 준 기업을 엄격하게 규제해야 함

기획재정부 주도의 경제발전경험 공유 사업

은 한국의 경제발전 경험을 수원국에 이식

를 활용할 수 있고 개발협력에 대한 통합적 접근을 기대하기 어려움

은 한국의 경제발전 경험을 수원국에 이식

를 활용할 수 있고 개발협력에 대한 통합적 접근을 기대하기 어려움

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의 주도로 이루어

져야 함

국제개발협력기본법상의 중점협력대상국 선정 기준 모호하고 정부는 선정사유를 공개하지 않음 국별협력전략 를 공개하고

기획재정부 주도의 경제발전경험 공유 사업 시키는 것으로

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의 주도로 이루어

이 실제 사업계획에 적용되지 않기도 함 중점협력대상국 선정사유

구축과 사업시행이 일관성 있게 이루어지도록 원조기관들의 실질적인 협

를 공개하고

이 실제 사업계획에 적용되지 않기도 함 중점협력대상국 선정사유

구축과 사업시행이 일관성 있게 이루어지도록 원조기관들의 실질적인 협

의 절차가 반드시 필요함

예산으로 군사활동인 아프간 근본취지에 부합하지 않음

국제개발협력기본법상의 중점협력대상국 선정 기준 모호하고 정부는 선정사유를 공개하지 않음 국별협력전략

의 절차가 반드시 필요함

정책의 문제점과 개선 방향을 다음과 같이 제시하고자 한다

역할을 하는데 한계가 있으므로 장기적으로 일원화되고 독립적인 원조전담 기구를 설립해

시키는 것으로

정책의 개선과 질적 성장을 위한 정

역할을 하는데 한계가 있으므로 장기적으로 일원화되고 독립적인 원조전담 기구를 설립해

할 우려가 상당히 높음 기재부가 유상원조 주관기관으로 적합한지 재검토가 필요함

정책위원회는 이 같은 정책방향에 대해 우려를 표하며 관련 정책의 문제점과

부의 적극적인 노력을 촉구하는 바이다

원조 규모는 보다 확대되어야 하고 유상원조 비율을 적극적으로 줄여 가야 함

의 근본적인 목적인 빈곤타파와 지속가능한 성장 에 부합하고 있다고

개선방향을 아래와 같이 밝히고자 한다 아울러 한국

부의 적극적인 노력을 촉구하는 바이다

정책은 그 동안 꾸준히 제기되었던 고질적인 문제를 그다지 개선하지 못

보기 어렵다

개선방향을 아래와 같이 밝히고자 한다 아울러 한국

차 국제개발협력위원회에서 논의된 내용이나 확정 발표된 정책방향을 살

했을 뿐만 아니라

보기 어렵다 참여연대

월에 열린

분담금을 지원하는 것은 원조 군사화로 에 대한

예산 지원을 즉각 시정하고

예산으로 군사활동인 아프간 근본취지에 부합하지 않음

를 철수해야 함

분담금을 지원하는 것은 원조 군사화로 에 대한

예산 지원을 즉각 시정하고

를 철수해야 함

년

- 143 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

년

- 143 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

국내 개발 컨설팅 확대는

자금이 한국으로 환수되는 조건부 원조라는 수원국 시민사

회의 비난여론을 피하기 어려움 정부는 국내 컨설팅 확대가 조건부 원조가 되지 않도록

수원국의 인프라를 활용할 수 있도록 해야 함

관련 정보의 공개수준 정보의 질이 매우 낮음 정부는 적극적 자발적 신속한 정보 공개를 통해 원조 투명성을 제고해야 함

국내 개발 컨설팅 확대는

참여연대 보고서 제

공개를 통해 원조 투명성을 제고해야 함

호

- 144 -

관련 정보의 공개수준 정보의 질이 매우 낮음 정부는 적극적 자발적 신속한 정보

참여연대 보고서 제

호

- 144 -

한국 ODA정책의 문제점과 개선 방향

지난해 정부는 부산 세계개발원조총회 이하 부산 총회 를 개최하면서 국제 원조 규범에 적극적

으로 동참하고

를 받던 나라에서 공여국 반열에 올라간 국가로써 그 책임을 다할 것을 공

약한 바 있다 더욱이 올해 한국은 토하는

개발원조위원회

년은 한국의

정책이 국제규범에 걸맞게 개선되고 있는지 여부를 검 의 동료 검토

를 받던 나라에서 공여국 반열에 올라간 국가로써 그 책임을 다할 것을 공

약한 바 있다 더욱이 올해 한국은

를 앞두고 있다 이 때문에

토하는

정책이 질적으로 성장하는 한 해가 될 것이라는 기대를 모으고 있는 것도 사

개발원조위원회

년은 한국의

실이다

정책이 국제규범에 걸맞게 개선되고 있는지 여부를 검 의 동료 검토

를 앞두고 있다 이 때문에

정책이 질적으로 성장하는 한 해가 될 것이라는 기대를 모으고 있는 것도 사

실이다

그러나

년

향 즉

년

월에 열린

차 국제개발협력위원회에서 논의된 내용이나 확정 발표된 정책방

종합시행계획

년 업무계획 예산 경제발전경험 공유 사업

발전방

그러나

년

향 즉

년

월에 열린

차 국제개발협력위원회에서 논의된 내용이나 확정 발표된 정책방

종합시행계획

년 업무계획 예산 경제발전경험 공유 사업

발전방

안 등을 살펴보면 한국의

정책은 그 동안 꾸준히 제기되었던 고질적인 문제를 그다지 개

안 등을 살펴보면 한국의

정책은 그 동안 꾸준히 제기되었던 고질적인 문제를 그다지 개

선하지 못했을 뿐만 아니라

의 근본적인 목적인 빈곤타파와 지속가능한 성장 에 부합하고

선하지 못했을 뿐만 아니라

의 근본적인 목적인 빈곤타파와 지속가능한 성장 에 부합하고

있다고 보기 어렵다

참여연대

정책위원회는 이 같은 정책방향에 대해 우려를 표하며 관련 정책의 문제점과

개선방향을 아래와 같이 밝히고자 한다 아울러 한국

정책의 개선과 질적 성장을 위한 정

정책위원회는 이 같은 정책방향에 대해 우려를 표하며 관련 정책의 문제점과

개선방향을 아래와 같이 밝히고자 한다 아울러 한국

부의 적극적인 노력을 촉구하는 바이다

정책의 개선과 질적 성장을 위한 정

부의 적극적인 노력을 촉구하는 바이다

1. 국제개발협력위원회의 ODA정책 심의·조정 역할 부실, ODA 분절화 지속

: 일원화되고 독립적인 원조전담기구 설립 적극 검토해야

한국 정부는

년

의 분산된 집행체계의 문제점을 극복하기 위해 국제개발협력기본

년

의 분산된 집행체계의 문제점을 극복하기 위해 국제개발협력기본

법 을 제정하고 국무총리실 산하 국제개발협력위원회 이하 협력위원회 의 위상을 높였다

이를 통해 정부는 이전의 거의 유명무실했던 협력위원회의 정책 심의 조정 역할을 강화해

국제개발협력에 관한 정책이 종합적 체계적으로 추진하겠다는 목적을 세운 바 있다

그러나 여전히

개 부처에서 개발원조 사업이 시행되고 있는 분절화 현상은 개선되지 않

그러나 여전히

개 부처에서 개발원조 사업이 시행되고 있는 분절화 현상은 개선되지 않

고 있다 오히려 원조시행기관 이외의 부처들이 수행하던 국제협력사업이

년부터

고 있다 오히려 원조시행기관 이외의 부처들이 수행하던 국제협력사업이

년부터

사업으로 전환되면서 부처별 원조사업 예산은 증가했다 이는

개발원조위원

사업으로 전환되면서 부처별 원조사업 예산은 증가했다 이는

개발원조위원

회

의 특별검토

년

에서도 지적되었던 한국의 원조 집행의 분절화 문제를

회

협력위원회가 제대로 해결하지 못하고 있다는 것을 보여주고 있다

한국 정부는

의 특별검토

년

에서도 지적되었던 한국의 원조 집행의 분절화 문제를

협력위원회가 제대로 해결하지 못하고 있다는 것을 보여주고 있다

이러한 문제점은 국제개발협력기본법 제정 당시 시민사회단체들이 우려했던 사항이기도 하

다 당시 시민사회단체들은 협력위원회가 이원화된 원조 부처간 이기주의를 현실적으로 조

정하기 어려울 것으로 보고 협력위원회의 실질적인 심의 조정 역할을 높일 수 있는 제도적

국회예산정책처

년도 예산안 중점 분석

국회예산정책처 년

- 145 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

년도 예산안 중점 분석 년

- 145 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

장치를 마련하거나 별도의 독립적 원조전담기구를 만드는 것을 제안한 바 있다 정부는

가 여전히 분절적으로 집행되고 있는 문제에 대해 제대로 조정역할을 하지 못하고 있

는 협력위원회의 한계를 인정하고 일원화되고 독립적인 원조전담 기구 설립을 적극 검토

해야 한다

2. OECD개발원조위원회 평균치에도 못미치는 원조 규모와 높은 유상원조 비율

: 원조 규모 확대하고 유상원조 비율 대폭 줄여야

년

개 회원국 중 원조규모 면에서

까지

를

개발원조위원회 데 정부는

: 원조 규모 확대하고 유상원조 비율 대폭 줄여야 위였던 한국은 원조규모를

년

로 확대하겠다는 계획을 발표한 바 있다 세계 경제위기 속에서도 회원국들의 원조규모

년 원조규모를

가 평균

개 회원국 중 원조규모 면에서

까지

를 상회하고 있는 가운

를

개발원조위원회

인 약 조 천억 원으로 확정하였다

데 정부는

한국의 원조규모가 워낙 작은 상황에서 원조액 자체를 증액했다는 것은 긍정적으로 평가할

위였던 한국은 원조규모를

로 확대하겠다는 계획을 발표한 바 있다 세계 경제위기 속에서도 회원국들의 원조규모

년 원조규모를

가 평균

를 상회하고 있는 가운

인 약 조 천억 원으로 확정하였다

한국의 원조규모가 워낙 작은 상황에서 원조액 자체를 증액했다는 것은 긍정적으로 평가할 부분이다 그러나 한국의 대외 무역 규모나 경제력에 비추어 원조규모는 보다 확대될 필요

가 있다

또 다른 문제는 한국의 유상원조 비율이 여전히 높다는 점이다 때

년 이들 국가들의 유상원조 비율은 평균

다

년에도 유상원조 비율은

회원국들과 비교했을

인데 비해 한국은

를 상회하였

를 넘을 것으로 전망된다

국제개발협력사회에서 유상원조 대신 무상원조를 통한 개발지원을 강조하고 있는 가운데 회원국이

개 국가나 되는 등 무상원조의 비율이 압도적으

또 다른 문제는 한국의 유상원조 비율이 여전히 높다는 점이다 때

년 이들 국가들의 유상원조 비율은 평균

다

년에도 유상원조 비율은

회원국들과 비교했을

인데 비해 한국은

를 상회하였

를 넘을 것으로 전망된다

국제개발협력사회에서 유상원조 대신 무상원조를 통한 개발지원을 강조하고 있는 가운데 무상원조만을 지원하는

회원국이

개 국가나 되는 등 무상원조의 비율이 압도적으

로 높음 한국의 유상원조 비율이 점차 줄어들고는 있으나 정부는 유상원조 비율을 더 적

극적으로 줄여 나갈 필요가 있음

3. ODA가 해외시장 창출 등 대외경제정책 지원하기 위한 도구로 오용될 가능성

: 기재부가 유상원조 주관기관으로 적합한지 재검토해야

한국 정부는 인도네시아 베트남 등 신흥개도국과 경제협력을 강화하기 위한 노력을 기울

여왔다 한국의 해외 시장과 자원 개척을 위해 개도국과 경제협력에 나서는 것은 국가 상

호간의 경제발전을 위해서 필요한 일이다 그러나

가 경제협력을 뒷받침하고 지원하는

수단으로 활용되는 것은 문제가 크다

년

부분이다 그러나 한국의 대외 무역 규모나 경제력에 비추어 원조규모는 보다 확대될 필요

무상원조만을 지원하는

년 지식경제부가 발표한

한 인니 경제협력 파트너쉽을 위한

는 인도네

시아 경제개발 마스터플랜 을 이행하기 위한 수단으로 대외경제협력기금

의 기본약정

참여연대 보고서 제

대외경제협력기금 으로

- 146 -

년 지식경제부가 발표한

한 인니 경제협력 파트너쉽을 위한

는 인도네

시아 경제개발 마스터플랜 을 이행하기 위한 수단으로 대외경제협력기금

의 기본약정

참여연대 외 시민사회단체 논평 국제개발협력기본법 안 의 전면적인 재검토를 요청한다

억원이 집행될 예정임

년 기획재정부 업무계획 에 따르면

호

특히 올해 신흥 개도국과의 경제협력과 개발협력이 본격적으로 진행될 것으로 전망되는 가 운데

참여연대 외 시민사회단체 논평 국제개발협력기본법 안 의 전면적인 재검토를 요청한다 년 기획재정부 업무계획 에 따르면

가 경제협력을 뒷받침하고 지원하는

수단으로 활용되는 것은 문제가 크다

특히 올해 신흥 개도국과의 경제협력과 개발협력이 본격적으로 진행될 것으로 전망되는 가 운데

년

참여연대 보고서 제

대외경제협력기금 으로

호

- 146 -

억원이 집행될 예정임

규모를 확대하는 방안을 검토하고 있고 기재부는 대외경제정책 추진전략 중 하나로 한

아세안

활용을 높이기 위해 체결 국가에 대한

다 이는 한국 정부가

확대가 필요하다 고 밝히고 있

를 대외경제정책의 도구이자 해외 시장 개척을 위한 수단으로

활용을 높이기 위해 체결 국가에 대한

다 이는 한국 정부가

확대가 필요하다 고 밝히고 있

를 대외경제정책의 도구이자 해외 시장 개척을 위한 수단으로

삼고 있다는 것을 보여주는 대목이다 하지만 이러한 정부정책은 빈곤퇴치와 감소 개발지

원에서의 호혜성을 중요시하는 국제협력의 근본취지에 어긋나며 국제적 흐름에도 역행하는

일이다

특히 국가재정과 경제정책을 관할하는 기재부가 유상원조를 운영하는 것은

를 경제협

특히 국가재정과 경제정책을 관할하는 기재부가 유상원조를 운영하는 것은

력정책의 하나의 수단이자 자국 이해에 따라 활용할 수 있는 자금으로 쓰일 수 있다는 우

려를 더해주고 있다 따라서 기재부가 유상원조를 주관하는 기관으로 적합한지도 재검토되

어야 한다

4. 기업의 개발협력사업 참여 확대로 인한 ODA 공공성 훼손 우려

: 기업의 국제규범 준수 강제 등 제도적 장치 마련이 선행되어야

지난

차 국제개발협력위원회는 민간부문과 협력을 강화하기 위해 민관협력 예산을 작년

대비

증가한

억원 수준으로 대폭 확대 하였다고 밝히고 있다 이는 곧 개발협력사

증가한

억원 수준으로 대폭 확대 하였다고 밝히고 있다 이는 곧 개발협력사

그러나 이미 국제개발협력기구나 공여국 수원국 시민사회는 과거 경험을 통해 기업이

의 공공성이 훼손될 수 있다는 점을 우려해왔다 기업이 벌

공공재 확보를 위한 수단인 개발협력에 대한 이해가 낮고 개발을 명분으로

차 국제개발협력위원회는 민간부문과 협력을 강화하기 위해 민관협력 예산을 작년

업에서 기업의 참여의 폭을 확대하겠다는 것으로 해석된다

그러나 이미 국제개발협력기구나 공여국 수원국 시민사회는 과거 경험을 통해 기업이 사업을 주도할 경우

지난 대비

업에서 기업의 참여의 폭을 확대하겠다는 것으로 해석된다

를 경제협

사업을 주도할 경우

사업을 사

의 공공성이 훼손될 수 있다는 점을 우려해왔다 기업이 벌

공공재 확보를 위한 수단인 개발협력에 대한 이해가 낮고 개발을 명분으로

사업을 사

유화할 가능성이 농후하기 때문이다 더욱이 개발협력사업에 있어 민간 기업의 참여 확대

는

를 기업의 해외진출의 수단으로 활용하려는 정부와 기업의 이해가 맞닿아있다

따라서 한국 정부가 민간 기업이

의 공공성을 훼손하지 않도록 하는 방안을 마련하지

를 기업의 해외진출의 수단으로 활용하려는 정부와 기업의 이해가 맞닿아있다

따라서 한국 정부가 민간 기업이

의 공공성을 훼손하지 않도록 하는 방안을 마련하지

않은 채 민관협력을 위한 예산부터 확대 배정한 것은 이러한 국제사회의 우려를 외면한 것

이라고 할 수 있다 정부가 민관협력을 강화하기 위해서는 그 전제조건으로 민간 기업이

국제 인권조약과

다국적기업 가이드라인

등 국제규범을 준수하도록

다국적기업 가이드라인

등 국제규범을 준수하도록

하고 수원국 주민들에게 피해를 준 기업을 엄격히 규제하는 등의 제도적 장치부터 마련해

야 한다 그러한 선행조치 없이 손쉽게 기업의 참여를 확대해서는 안된다

5. 통합적 접근 기대어려운 기재부 주도의 경제발전경험 공유사업(KSP) 추진

: KSP사업은 시민사회 참여와 개발협력 전문기관 주도로 이루어져야

지식경제부 보도자료 발리 합의 실천을 위한 발걸음 시작됐다

기획재정부 보도자료

국무총리실

년 대외경제정책 추진 전략

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료

년

- 147 -

국무총리실

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

년 대외경제정책 추진 전략

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료

년

- 147 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

기재부는 경제발전경험 공유사업 이하

에 대한 발전방안을 확정해

년까지

발전경험을 마무리할 계획이라고 밝히고 있다 그러나 기재부 주도의 한국의 경제발전 경험을 수원국에 무비판적으로 이식시키는데

개의

발전방안 모색은

를 활용하려는 것으로

한국의 경제발전 경험을 수원국에 무비판적으로 이식시키는데

그런 면에서 기재부가 개발협력사업 차원에서

사업을 검토하는 것은 적절하지 않다

사업은 한국의 경제발전이 가능하도록 했던 당시 국내외 정세와 환경

기재부 주도의

발전방안 모색은

를 활용하려는 것으로

사업을 검토하는 것은 적절하지 않다

사업은 한국의 경제발전이 가능하도록 했던 당시 국내외 정세와 환경

에 대한 고려없이 마치 한국의 경제정책이 성장 바이블 인 것처럼 오도될 가능성이 높다

이는 수원국의 주인의식

을 중시하는 시대적 흐름에 맞지 않는 일이다 특히

추진협의회 의 구성을 보면 기재부의 차관과 관계 부처 급 및 관계기관 부기관장 으

로 구성되어 있어 부처간 수평적 논의보다는 기재부의 일방적 주도로 귀결될 가능성이 높

다

이러한 점에서

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의

이러한 점에서

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의

주도로 이루어져야 마땅하다

6. 중점협력대상국 선정기준 모호하고 국별협력전략(CPS) 활용 제대로 안 돼

: 중점협력대상국 선정사유 공개 및 CPS 구축과 사업시행의 일관성 필요

이 선정한 최빈국이 상국 으로 선정한

개국인 가운데 한국 정부가 중점협력대상국 이하 협력대

개 국가 중 최빈국은 개국에 불과하다 이는 한국 정부의 개발원조가

없고 정부도 선정 사유를 밝히지 않고 있는 점도 큰 문제이다 한 예로

기본약정을 한

개국인 가운데 한국 정부가 중점협력대상국 이하 협력대

개 국가 중 최빈국은 개국에 불과하다 이는 한국 정부의 개발원조가

빈곤국가에 집중되지 않고 있음을 반증하고 있다

또한 국제개발협력기본법상 기준이 모호하여 협력대상국으로 선정한 사유나 근거를 알 수 으로

이 선정한 최빈국이 상국 으로 선정한

빈곤국가에 집중되지 않고 있음을 반증하고 있다

개의

개발문제는 수원국의 인권과 민주주의 증진 등을 함께 고려하는 통합적인 접근이 요구된다 그런 면에서 기재부가 개발협력사업 차원에서

주도로 이루어져야 마땅하다

년 협력대상국

또한 국제개발협력기본법상 기준이 모호하여 협력대상국으로 선정한 사유나 근거를 알 수 없고 정부도 선정 사유를 밝히지 않고 있는 점도 큰 문제이다 한 예로

개국 중 예멘이 있는데 중동과 북아프리카 지역의 민주화 이

으로

기본약정을 한

년 협력대상국

개국 중 예멘이 있는데 중동과 북아프리카 지역의 민주화 이

행 단계에 있는 여러 나라들이 존재하며 해당국가의 정세상 개발협력사업의 안정성 문제

가 대두되는 시점에서 정부가 유독 예멘을 협력대상국으로 선정한 이유와 근거를 밝히지

않고 있는 것이다 정부의 중점협력대상국 선정 사유의 비공개는 자원이 많거나 한국 기업

들의 진출 가능성이 높은 나라들로 협력대상국을 선정하고 있다는 의혹을 낳고 있다 따라

서 정부는 협력대상국 선정의 근거를 구체적으로 공개해야 마땅하다

중점협력대상국에 대한 통합 국별협력전략 이하

은

정적으로 작용할 것으로 기대되었던 부분이다 그러나 도의 경우 사업을 수행할 계획이 없다고 지적하고 있다

정책의 일관성을 높이는데 긍 를 마련하고도 실제 사업계획이

없는 경우도 발생하고 있다 일례로 국회예산정책처 분석보고서는

관계기관합동

참여연대 보고서 제

중점협력대상국에 대한 통합 국별협력전략 이하

가 수립된 솔로몬군

를 구축해 놓고도 이러한 현상

도의 경우 사업을 수행할 계획이 없다고 지적하고 있다

를 마련하고도 실제 사업계획이 가 수립된 솔로몬군

를 구축해 놓고도 이러한 현상

이 왜 생기는 것인지 의문이다 정책 일관성을 이루기 위해서는 원조기관들의 실질적인 협

관계기관합동

- 148 -

정책의 일관성을 높이는데 긍

없는 경우도 발생하고 있다 일례로 국회예산정책처 분석보고서는

발전 방안

호

은

정적으로 작용할 것으로 기대되었던 부분이다 그러나

이 왜 생기는 것인지 의문이다 정책 일관성을 이루기 위해서는 원조기관들의 실질적인 협

년까지

해석되기에 충분하다

개발문제는 수원국의 인권과 민주주의 증진 등을 함께 고려하는 통합적인 접근이 요구된다 기재부 주도의

에 대한 발전방안을 확정해

발전경험을 마무리할 계획이라고 밝히고 있다 그러나 기재부 주도의

해석되기에 충분하다

기재부는 경제발전경험 공유사업 이하

참여연대 보고서 제

발전 방안

호

- 148 -

의 절차를 반드시 거쳐

를 구축해야 하며 이를 통해

따로 사업 수행이 따로 가는

의 절차를 반드시 거쳐

일이 없도록 해야 한다

를 구축해야 하며 이를 통해

따로 사업 수행이 따로 가는

일이 없도록 해야 한다

7. ODA 예산으로 군사활동인 아프간 PRT, UN PKO 분담금 지원

: PRT, PKO에 대한 ODA 예산 지원 즉각 시정하고 PRT 철수해야

정부의 다자원조 중에는

평화유지군 이하

분담금으로 지원되는 자금이 포함되어

있다 또한 아프가니스탄에 주둔하고 있는 지역재건팀 지만

나

예산을 쓰고 있다 하

로서 그 자체로 적절치 않으며 특히 아프간

지만

예산을 투입하는 것은 원조를 군사화하는 것으

나

분담금으로 지원되는 자금이 포함되어

로서 그 자체로 적절치 않으며

는 재건지원 활동의 성과가 매우 미미하고 오히려 예산의 상당액을 기지

특히 아프간

를 비롯해 정부가 한미동

도

예산을 쓰고 있다 하

가 전후복구나 인도적 지원 활동을 하고 있지만 이는 근본적으로 군사

활동의 일환이다 이러한 군사활동에

근본취지에도 부합하지 않는 일이다

건설과 치안유지에 쓰고 있다는 것이 확인된 바 있다 아프간

평화유지군 이하

있다 또한 아프가니스탄에 주둔하고 있는 지역재건팀

가 전후복구나 인도적 지원 활동을 하고 있지만 이는 근본적으로 군사

활동의 일환이다 이러한 군사활동에

도

정부의 다자원조 중에는

예산을 투입하는 것은 원조를 군사화하는 것으 근본취지에도 부합하지 않는 일이다

는 재건지원 활동의 성과가 매우 미미하고 오히려 예산의 상당액을 기지

건설과 치안유지에 쓰고 있다는 것이 확인된 바 있다 아프간

를 비롯해 정부가 한미동

맹 차원에서 개발협력을 추진하는 것은 아프간 등 개발원조가 절대적으로 필요한 취약국

의 개발전략이나 주민들의 요구에 근거한 지원이 아니라 자국의 정치군사적 이해에 따라

를 활용하겠다는 의미이다 이 역시

목적과 취지에 어긋나는 일이다 나아가 이

를 활용하겠다는 의미이다 이 역시

목적과 취지에 어긋나는 일이다 나아가 이

러한 원조는 파견 요원들이 테러의 대상이 되는 것은 물론 취약국의 거버넌스와 책임성을

약화시키는 것으로 귀결되고 있다

예산을

분담금이나

파견비용으로 쓰는 것은

에 대한 잘못된 이해에서

예산을

분담금이나

파견비용으로 쓰는 것은

에 대한 잘못된 이해에서

비롯된 부적절한 예산 배정인 만큼 조속히 시정되어야 함 또한 원조를 군사적 용도로 쓰

고 있는 아프간

파견부대는 빠른 시일내 철수해야 함

8. ODA 자금의 환수 용도라는 비난을 받고 있는 국내 개발 컨설팅 확대

파견부대는 빠른 시일내 철수해야 함

8. ODA 자금의 환수 용도라는 비난을 받고 있는 국내 개발 컨설팅 확대

: 조건부 원조가 되지 않도록 수원국의 인프라 활용 등 노력해야

지난해 연말에 열린

차 국제개발협력위원회는 수원국의 개발역량 강화와 원조효과성을

지난해 연말에 열린

높이기 위해 개발컨설팅 비중을 대폭 확대 하겠다는 계획을 밝혔다 이러한 맥락에서

타당성조사에 대한 조사연구 등이 국책연구소를 통해 진행될 예정이다 그러나 이렇듯 자

국의 컨설팅을 강화하는 것은 전형적인

자금의 자국 환수용도라는 수원국 시민사회

의 비난여론이 높다

차 국제개발협력위원회는 수원국의 개발역량 강화와 원조효과성을

의 비난여론이 높다

원조효과성 제고를 위한 파리원칙에서 강조된 바 있듯이

참여연대

아프간 모니터

자금의 자국 환수용도라는 수원국 시민사회

실태에 대한 국제

고

박정은 분쟁국 원조와 원조의 군사화

국무총리실

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료

년

- 149 -

및

정책수립에는 수원국의 주

긴급구호 관계자의 분석과 권

인권분과 발표자료

참여연대

참고

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

원조효과성 제고를 위한 파리원칙에서 강조된 바 있듯이

아프간 모니터

실태에 대한 국제

고

박정은 분쟁국 원조와 원조의 군사화

국무총리실

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료

년

- 149 -

및

정책수립에는 수원국의 주

긴급구호 관계자의 분석과 권

인권분과 발표자료

참고

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

인의식

을 제고하는 방향에서 수원국의 인프라 자원을 이용할 것을 권고하고 있

다 이미 국제사회에서는 공여국의 시스템 고급 인력 활용 등으로

인의식

자금이 공여국으

을 제고하는 방향에서 수원국의 인프라 자원을 이용할 것을 권고하고 있

다 이미 국제사회에서는 공여국의 시스템 고급 인력 활용 등으로

로 환수되는 조건부 원조를 배제하는 방향으로 나아가고 있다 정부는 이러한 국제사회의

목소리에 귀 기울일 필요가 있다

9. ODA 관련 정보의 공개수준, 질적 수준 매우 낮아

: 적극적, 자발적, 신속한 정보공개 통해 원조 투명성 제고해야

참여연대

정책위원회는

년 부산개발원조총회를 즈음하여 이슈리포트 한국 원조

참여연대

정책위원회는

년 부산개발원조총회를 즈음하여 이슈리포트 한국 원조

의 투명성 평가와 정책제안 를 발표하면서 정부가 공개한 정보는 대체로 질이 떨어지거나

불충분하고 비공개되고 있는 정보가 많아 한국 원조의 투명성은 매우 낮다고 평가한 바

있다

관련하여 최근 정부가 반년 만에 개편된

종합정보사이트인

를 오픈한

관련하여 최근 정부가 반년 만에 개편된

종합정보사이트인

를 오픈한

것은 긍정적인 일이다 그러나 이 사이트는 아직 충분한 유 무상원조의 정보를 제공하고 있

지 못하다 지난

월 국제개발협력위원회에서 안건으로 회부되고 의결된 사안들을 공개하

는 데도 수일이 걸릴 것이라고 위원회는 해명하고 있다

자금이 공여국으

년 원조 효과성을 위한 원조 투명성과 책임성 을 강조한 아크라행동의제 채택 이후 국제 투명성 이니셔티브

발족과 정보공유시스템 구축 등 원조 투명성 제고를 위한 구

월 국제개발협력위원회에서 안건으로 회부되고 의결된 사안들을 공개하

는 데도 수일이 걸릴 것이라고 위원회는 해명하고 있다

년 원조 효과성을 위한 원조 투명성과 책임성 을 강조한 아크라행동의제 채택 이후 국제 투명성 이니셔티브

발족과 정보공유시스템 구축 등 원조 투명성 제고를 위한 구

체적인 노력들이 이루어지고 있고 부산 총회에서도 중요한 의제로 채택된 바 있다 한국

정부는 이러한 국제사회의 추세에 발맞추어 질적인 정보를 신속하게 공개하는 것은 물론

보다 적극적이고 자발적으로 공개하려는 노력을 기울일 필요가 있다

10 참여연대 보고서 제

호

- 150 -

호

- 150 -

제언

부산 총회를 계기로 국내외적으로 한국 정부는 신흥 공여국로서의 역할과 책임을 주목받고 있

다 국제개발협력위원회에서도 정부가 부산선언을 충실히 이행하도록 범정부차원에 후속조치를

취할 것을 강조했다 그러나 정부가 선진화 하겠다고 내놓는

정책은 한국

본적인 문제점은 그대로 둔 채 사업 내용들만 확장하고 호혜성을 가진

정책의 근

의 목적도 간과하

본적인 문제점은 그대로 둔 채 사업 내용들만 확장하고 호혜성을 가진

는 경우가 있다

따라서 참여연대는 한국

정책은 한국

정책의 근

의 목적도 간과하

는 경우가 있다

정책의 질적 개선과 성장을 위해 다음과 같은 개선 방향을 밝힌

따라서 참여연대는 한국

다

정책의 질적 개선과 성장을 위해 다음과 같은 개선 방향을 밝힌

다

국제개발협력위원회의 한계를 극복할 일원화되고 독립적인 원조전담기구를 설립해야 한다

한국의 경제력에 비추어 원조 규모를 보다 확대하고 유상원조 비율을 적극적으로 축소해야

한다

오용 방지를 위해 기획재정부가 유상원조 주관기관으로 적합한지 재검토가 필요하다

정부는 민간 기업들이 국제 인권조약 등 국제규범을 준수하도록 요구하고 수원국 주민에 게 피해를 준 기업을 엄격하게 규제해야 한다

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의 주도로 이루어 져야 한다

오용 방지를 위해 기획재정부가 유상원조 주관기관으로 적합한지 재검토가 필요하다

사업은 기재부가 아닌 시민사회의 참여를 비롯해 개발협력 전문기관의 주도로 이루어 져야 한다

중점협력대상국 선정사유를 공개하고 중점협력대상국에 대한 통합 국별협력전략

구

중점협력대상국 선정사유를 공개하고 중점협력대상국에 대한 통합 국별협력전략

구

축과 사업시행이 일관성 있게 이루어지도록 원조기관들의 실질적인 협의 절차가 이루어 져

야 한다

야 한다 에 대한

예산 지원을 즉각 시정하고

를 철수해야 한다

에 대한

예산 지원을 즉각 시정하고

를 철수해야 한다

국내 컨설팅 확대가 조건부 원조가 되지 않도록 수원국의 인프라를 활용하도록 해야 한다

정부는 적극적 자발적 신속한 정보공개를 통해 원조 투명성을 강화해야 한다

년

- 151 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

년

- 151 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

[참고 자료]

국무총리실

국회예산정책처

기획재정부

기획재정부 보도자료

관계기관합동

박정은 분쟁국 원조와 원조의 군사화

지식경제부 보도자료 발리 합의 실천을 위한 발걸음 시작됐다

참여연대

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료 년도 예산안 중점 분석 년 기획재정부 업무계획 년 대외경제정책 추진 전략

발전 방안

아프간 모니터

인권분과 발표자료

실태에 대한 국제

및

긴급구호 관계자의 분

국무총리실

국회예산정책처

기획재정부

기획재정부 보도자료

관계기관합동

박정은 분쟁국 원조와 원조의 군사화

지식경제부 보도자료 발리 합의 실천을 위한 발걸음 시작됐다

참여연대

석과 권고

년도 예산안 중점 분석 년 기획재정부 업무계획 년 대외경제정책 추진 전략

발전 방안

아프간 모니터

인권분과 발표자료

실태에 대한 국제

참여연대 외 시민사회단체 논평 국제개발협력기본법 안 의 전면적인 재검토를 요청한다

공적개발원조 개발원조위원회 대외경제협력기금

공적개발원조 개발원조위원회

대외경제협력기금

경제발전경험 공유사업

국별협력전략

긴급구호 관계자의 분

[참고] 약어 영문·국문 풀이

및

석과 권고

[참고] 약어 영문·국문 풀이

차 국제개발협력위원회 개최 보도자료

평화유지군 지역재건팀

국제 투명성 이니셔티브

- 152 -

평화유지군 지역재건팀

국제 투명성 이니셔티브

- 152 -

참여연대 보고서 제

호

참여연대 보고서 제

호

2012년 ODA정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견서

발 행 일

발 행 처

참여연대

담

차은하 간사

당

참여연대

정책위원회

발 행 처

참여연대

담

차은하 간사

당

본 자료는 참여연대 웹사이트에서 다시 볼 수 있습니다

세상을 바꾸는 시민의 힘 정부보조금

참여연대

회원의 회비로 운영됩니다

대표전화

회원가입

후원 소

본 자료는 참여연대 웹사이트에서 다시 볼 수 있습니다

세상을 바꾸는 시민의 힘 정부보조금

대표전화

주

정책위원회

회원의 회비로 운영됩니다

후원 서울시 종로구 통인동

번지

주

홈페이지

소

서울시 종로구 통인동

번지

홈페이지

년

- 153 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

년

- 153 -

정책 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 참여연대 의견

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[시민사회]

19대 국회에서 다루어야 할 15대

ODA 개혁과제

(ODA Watch, 국제민주연대, 녹색당,

에너지기후정책연구소, 참여연대)

ODA워치•국제민주연대•녹색당•에너지기후정책연구소•참여연대

19대 국회에서 다루어야 할 15대 ODA 개혁과제 발표

- 157 -

- 158 -

ODA워치•국제민주연대•녹색당•에너지기후정책연구소•참여연대

- 159 -

- 160 -

- 161 -

- 162 -

OECD Peer Review와 한국 ODA의 개선방안

[시민사회]

2012년 DAC 동료검토를 앞둔

한국 ODA에 대한 사전동료검토

요약 보고서

(ODA Watch)

년

동료검토를 앞둔 한국

에 대한

의 사전 동료검토 년

월

요약 보고서

심사단이 동료검토

한국을 방문한다 동료검토는

이

년

의 일환으로 현장 조사를 위해

개 회원국을 대상으로 국가 별로

년 주기마

동료검토를 앞둔 한국

에 대한

의 사전 동료검토 년

월

요약 보고서

심사단이 동료검토

한국을 방문한다 동료검토는

이

의 일환으로 현장 조사를 위해

개 회원국을 대상으로 국가 별로

년 주기마

다 실시하는 평가로써 대상 국가의 개발협력 정책 프레임워크 및 시스템을 검토하고 개

선 사항을 제시하는 활동을 일컫는다 이는 개발원조의 궁극적인 달성 목표인 빈곤퇴치

및 지속가능한 발전의 실현을 위해 주요 공여국들이 집행하는 원조의 질을 제고하기 위

한 목적으로 실시되는 것이다 특히 동료검토라는 이름에 걸맞게 회원국들이 서로의 개

발원조를 평가하는 장치를 마련함으로써 상호 간에 대외원조의 특성을 파악하고 성공

실패 사례를 공유할 수 있는 학습의 기회를 제공하기도 한다

한국은 지난

년

특별검토

가입에 앞서 이를 준비하기 위한 과정의 일환으로 를 받은 바 있다 따라서 이번

년에

년 동료검토는 한국이

한국은 지난

년

특별검토

가입에 앞서 이를 준비하기 위한 과정의 일환으로 를 받은 바 있다 따라서 이번

에 가입한 이래 처음으로 받게 되는 정식 평가이기도 하다

이번 동료검토의 일정은 한국 정부가 지난

한 현재까지의 이행사항을 정리하고 한다 이 메모랜덤을 바탕으로 은 보통

사무국

년 특별검토 이후 받았던 권고사항에 대

월 초

은

에 메모랜덤을 제출하는 것부터 시작

월 중순 경 심사단을 구성하여 방한한다 심사단

명 회원국 두 곳에서 각

명 인도적 지원 전문가로 구성된

다 이번에 한국에 방문하는 회원국은 독일과 호주가 될 예정이다

올해 한국이 받게 되는

한 현재까지의 이행사항을 정리하고 한다 이 메모랜덤을 바탕으로 은 보통

사무국

년 특별검토 이후 받았던 권고사항에 대

월 초

은

년에

년 동료검토는 한국이

에 메모랜덤을 제출하는 것부터 시작

월 중순 경 심사단을 구성하여 방한한다 심사단

명 회원국 두 곳에서 각

명 인도적 지원 전문가로 구성된

다 이번에 한국에 방문하는 회원국은 독일과 호주가 될 예정이다

동료검토는 개선이 필요한 한국 대외원조의 정책과 시스템

올해 한국이 받게 되는

동료검토는 개선이 필요한 한국 대외원조의 정책과 시스템

에 실질적인 변화를 만들어낼 수 있는 좋은 기회이다 선진 공여국 클럽의 일원이 된 한국이 대외

원조 정책과 체계의 선진화를 위해 노력하고 있음을 입증해야 하는 자리이자

사무국을 비

롯한 동료 국가들에게 받는 첫 번째 정식 평가라는 점에서 한국 정부는 검토 결과에 민감할 수밖

에 없다 또한 그동안 한국

의 질적 제고를 위해 끊임없이 목소리를 높여왔던 국제개발협력

분야의 시민사회단체들에게도 동료검토는 우리의 의견을 전달하고 관철시킬 수 있는 주요한 계기

가 될 것이다

년은 한국에게 있어 총선과 대선이 함께 치러지는 정치적인 변화의 해이자 한국 대외원조가 질적으로 성장할 수 있는 주요한 해이다 이에

는 올해를

한국 대외원조 정치의제화

의 해 로 선포하였으며 개발협력에 관련된 국내 주요 이해당사자들에게

에 대한 인지를 확

년은 한국에게 있어 총선과 대선이 함께 치러지는 정치적인 변화의 해이자 한국 대외원조가 질적으로 성장할 수 있는 주요한 해이다 이에

는 올해를

한국 대외원조 정치의제화

의 해 로 선포하였으며 개발협력에 관련된 국내 주요 이해당사자들에게

에 대한 인지를 확

산하고 실질적인 정책 변화를 일으키기 위한 활동을 펼쳐나가고 있다 이러한 운동의 일환으로 우

리단체는 한국 정부가 그동안 원조의 규모 증액 및 질적 제고와 관련하여 국제사회에 제시했던 수

많은 약속들의 이행 여부를 살펴보고 개선이 필요한 부분에 대한 변화를 촉구하고자 한다

우리는 이번 동료검토가 한국

에 대한 정확하고 공정한 분석 자료를 토대로 더욱 엄중하고

세밀하게 이뤄져야 한다는 인식을 바탕으로

년 특별검토 시에 받았던 권고 사항에 대한 이행

우리는 이번 동료검토가 한국

에 대한 정확하고 공정한 분석 자료를 토대로 더욱 엄중하고

세밀하게 이뤄져야 한다는 인식을 바탕으로

년 특별검토 시에 받았던 권고 사항에 대한 이행

현황을 보다 심층적으로 분석하여 실사단에게 전달할 계획이다 또한 동료검토를 계기로 한국 정

부가 대외원조 정책 및 시스템의 변화의 필요성을 인지하도록 촉구하기 위해 이번 보고서를 통해

시민사회의 목소리를 제기하고자 한다 이에

는 한국

의 현황과 실태를 아래와

는 한국

의 현황과 실태를 아래와

같이 밝히며 개선을 위한 제언을 제시한다 정부는 한국 원조의 정책 프레임워크를 발전시키기 위

해 적극적으로 노력해야 하며 시민사회는 동료검토에 더욱 관심을 가지고 적극 대응함으로써 응

집력 있는 목소리로 정부의 변화를 촉구해야 한다

- 165 -

에서는 동료검토를 위한 공통의 가이드라인을 설정하여 총 으로 회원 국가의 원조를 평가하고 있다 이에 이 보고서도

가지 주제에 따른 세부사항을 기준 가이드라인에 의거하여 한국

에 대한 분석 내용을 아래와 같이 구성하였다 표

가이드라인

년

주제

개발협력의 전략적 방향

원조를 넘어 개발

년 동료검토 예상 세부 평가 항목 권고 사항을 바탕으로 예

상되는 주제 별 세부 평가 항목 개발협력 전반의 법적 프레임워크 대외원조 전략과 정책 대외원조를 총괄하는 단일 조직 구성 대중 인지제고 시민사회와의 협력 강화

환경 이민 무역

조직과 관리

원조효과성과 성과

인도적 지원

표

평가 가이드라인에 따른

본문

평가

구성

가이드라인

원조를 넘어 개발

가이드라인에 의거하여 한국

년 동료검토 예상 세부 평가 항목 권고 사항을 바탕으로 예

환경 이민 무역

원조 규모 증대 무상 원조 비율 확대 중점협력국 선정 기준 명확화 및 원조

원조 규모 채널 분배

원조 규모 증대 무상 원조 비율 확대 중점협력국 선정 기준 명확화 및 원조 배분 규칙 제시

중점 지원 분야 선정 축소

중점 지원 분야 선정 축소 조직과 관리

원조효과성과 성과

파리선언 이행 모니터링 조사 참여 주 인의식 원조일치 원조조화 이행 여부 비구속성 원조 확대 인도적 지원 정책 수립

인도적 지원

가 제시하는 한국

관계 부처 및 기관 간 조율 협력 강화 통합 국별원조전략 수립 효과적 원조관리를 위한 인력 확보 모니터링 및 평가 활성화 원조효과성 아젠다 파리선언 이행 모니터링 조사 참여 주 인의식 원조일치 원조조화 이행 여부 비구속성 원조 확대 인도적 지원 정책 수립 다자원조 채널 확대 및 활용

정책 개선 과제

통합원조 시스템 마련

표

가 제시하는 한국

정책 개선 과제

통합원조 시스템 마련

독립적인 국제개발청 혹은 전담 부처를 신설할 것

대외원조 기본계획 수립지침에 통합원조 지침을 명확히 명시할 것

여개의 유

구성

가지 영역 평가

배분 규칙 제시 관계 부처 및 기관 간 조율 협력 강화 통합 국별원조전략 수립 효과적 원조관리를 위한 인력 확보 모니터링 및 평가 활성화 원조효과성 아젠다

본문

개발을 위한 정책일관성

가지 영역 평가

다자원조 채널 확대 및 활용

표

년

주제

개발협력의 전략적 방향

개발을 위한 정책일관성

원조 규모 채널 분배

가지 주제에 따른 세부사항을 기준

에 대한 분석 내용을 아래와 같이 구성하였다

평가 가이드라인에 따른

평가

에서는 동료검토를 위한 공통의 가이드라인을 설정하여 총 으로 회원 국가의 원조를 평가하고 있다 이에 이 보고서도

무상 원조실시 기관을 통합할 것

여개의 유

무상 원조실시 기관을 통합할 것

이를 통해 원조분절화로 인한 파트너 국가의 행정 부담을 줄이고 일원화된 정책 수립

과 사업을 추진할 것

유

무상 원조 통합 목표 연도를 설정하고 연차별 추진방안을 마련할 것

유

무상 원조 통합 목표 연도를 설정하고 연차별 추진방안을 마련할 것

유

무상 주관기관 간의 협상 채널을 강화하고 분야별 기본계획 및 시행계획을 통합

유

무상 주관기관 간의 협상 채널을 강화하고 분야별 기본계획 및 시행계획을 통합

적으로 수립할 것

국제기구와 다자은행을 통한 원조를 통폐합할 것

일원화된 원조철학 마련

통합적이고 일원화된 한국 원조의 철학과 전략을 수립할 것

- 166 -

통합적이고 일원화된 한국 원조의 철학과 전략을 수립할 것

- 166 -

선진화방안에 따라 무리하게 한국형 원조를 추진함으로써 대외원조가 공여국 중심주

의로 흘러가지 않도록 할 것

핵심가치와 원칙을 수립하고 모든 과정과 단계에서 반영되도록 할 것

각 부처가 개별적으로 분야별

만드는 것을 지양할 것

한국의 원조 철학에 국제사회의 보편적 규범과 교훈을 반영할 것

만드는 것을 지양할 것

한국의 원조 철학에 국제사회의 보편적 규범과 교훈을 반영할 것

원조의 양과 질 효과성 제고

원조 규모 확대

선진국들의 평균 수준 년까지

대비

평균

대비

까지 원조 규모를 확대할 것

선진국들의 평균 수준

라는 증액 약속 달성을 위한 구체적인 실행 계획을 마련

년까지

할 것

대비

평균

대비

까지 원조 규모를 확대할 것

라는 증액 약속 달성을 위한 구체적인 실행 계획을 마련

할 것

무상원조 비율 확대

의 규범 및 국제사회의 추세에 맞춰 무상원조 비율을 대폭 확대할 것

최빈국에 대한 유상원조를 폐지하고 무상원조 비율을 확대할 것

비구속성 원조 비율 확대

무상뿐만이 아니라 유상원조의 비구속성 비율을 확대하여

년까지 구속성 원조를

무상뿐만이 아니라 유상원조의 비구속성 비율을 확대하여

단계적으로 폐지할 것

년까지 구속성 원조를

단계적으로 폐지할 것

원조효과성 제고

한국의 비교우위를 명확하게 파악함으로써 원조 분야의 선택과 집중을 할 것

다른 공여국과 공통의 행정 절차 시스템을 활용하고 공동 현지조사 및 국가분석 작업

에 적극적으로 참여하여 원조조화 노력을 강화할 것

최빈국들을 중심으로 중점협력국을 선정하여

목적으로

의 근본 목표인 빈곤 퇴치를 위한

예산을 사용할 것

목적으로

대국민 인지제고 및 원조 투명성 책무성 강화

예산을 사용할 것

대국민 인지제고 및 원조 투명성 책무성 강화

대국민 인지제고 국민들에게

의 근본 목표인 빈곤 퇴치를 위한

대국민 인지제고

에 대한 인지제고 및 홍보를 강화할 것

인지제고를 위한 기초적인 정보뿐만 아니라 원조예산 국별협력전략

국민들에게 중점지원국

에 대한 인지제고 및 홍보를 강화할 것

인지제고를 위한 기초적인 정보뿐만 아니라 원조예산 국별협력전략

가 및 선정 이유 사전 사후평가결과 등과 같은 주요 정보를 반드시 공개할 것

중점지원국

가 및 선정 이유 사전 사후평가결과 등과 같은 주요 정보를 반드시 공개할 것

원조 투명성 책무성 강화

수립 관련 정보를 적극 공개하여 원조 투명성과 책임성을 제고할 것

원조사업 평가 결과를 국민들에게 공개함으로써 책무성을 강화하고 정부의 개선 의지

를 확고하게 증명할 것

중점협력국 선정 기준 및 결과를 투명하게 공개할 것

국정감사 등 국회의 대외원조정책 감시 기능을 강화할 것

시민사회 및 민간과의 파트너십 강화

정책결정과정에 공식적인 민간의견수렴의 기회를 마련하고 민간 참여를 확대할 것

민간을 핵심적인 파트너로 인식하고 기획 실행 평가 전 과정에서의 참여를 보장할

것

것 소수의 전문가 외에 다양한 층위의 민간 전문가들의 참여 범위를 넓힐 것

소수의 전문가 외에 다양한 층위의 민간 전문가들의 참여 범위를 넓힐 것

시민사회를 통한 민간원조를 대폭 확대할 것

통합

수립을 위해 주관부처 및 시행기관 국별 지역전문가 학계 및 시민사회 전

문가들이 참여하는 범정부적인 국가지원전략 전문가회의를 설치 운영할 것

모니터링 및 평가 과정에 시민사회의 참여를 확대할 것

모니터링 및 평가 강화

내 외부 사전 영향평가 및 사후평가에 대한 지속적인 투자를 통해 평가의 질을 제고

- 167 -

할 것

민간이 참여하는 독립적인 평가 시스템을 마련하고 이를 강화할 것

평가의 결과가 향후 반영될 수 있도록 보장하는 환류 시스템을 마련할 것

파트너국가와의 협력 확대 및 현장 체계 강화

파트너국가와의 협력 확대 파트너국의 우선순위와 정책을

파트너국가와의 협력 확대 에 적극 반영할 것

파트너국의 우선순위와 정책을

에 적극 반영할 것

파트너 국가와의 충분한 협의를 통해 이들의 개발 수요와 우선순위에 대한 집중적 지

원을 기반으로 하는

를 수립하여 파트너국가의 주인의식 강화에 기여할 것

중기 원조집행계획을 수립 파트너 국가와 공유하여 원조 예측성을 높이고 파트너 국

가의 개발계획 및 정책 수립 역량 강화에 기여할 것

파트너국가의 공공재정관리 시스템 활용도를

회원국 평균 수준으로 확대할 것

현장 체계 강화

회원국 평균 수준으로 확대할 것

현장 체계 강화

원조효과성을 제고하기 위한 방향으로 현장 체계를 강화할 것

파트너국가의 해외 공관 및

해외사무소를 통해 각 부처 및 기관의 산발적인

원조를 조정할 것

개발을 위한 정책일관성 제고 전략 환경 평가

해외사무소를 통해 각 부처 및 기관의 산발적인

개발을 위한 정책일관성 제고

를 마련하고 환경 영향 평가

를 강화할 것

전략 환경 평가

를 마련하고 환경 영향 평가

를 강화할 것

개발을 위한 정책일관성을 담보할 수 있도록 관련 정책과 법제를 마련할 것

녹색

집행 시 개도국의 실제 필요와 현지 사정에 맞춰서 계획을 수립할 것

부처 간 협력 부재로 인한 예산 낭비를 해결하고 이민청을 설립하되 외국인 문제를

출입국통제 관점에서 접근하는 법무부 산하에 두지 말 것

유엔 이주노동자 협약에 가입할 것

최빈국 특혜관세에 해당하는 공여품목을 확대할 것

정책 비일관성을 해결하기 위해 무역을 위한 원조

에 참여하는 모든 관

정책 비일관성을 해결하기 위해 무역을 위한 원조

련 부처를 대상으로 범정부적인 논의의 장을 구성할 것 년 도하

련 부처를 대상으로 범정부적인 논의의 장을 구성할 것

개발의제에서 결의한 바와 같이 농업 분야의 모든 수출 보조금을

년 도하

점진적으로 철폐하기로 한 약속을 이행할 것 위 표

는

가 제시하는 한국

정렬한 것이다 각 챕터

개발의제에서 결의한 바와 같이 농업 분야의 모든 수출 보조금을

점진적으로 철폐하기로 한 약속을 이행할 것

정책 프레임워크의 개선 과제를 주요 주제 별로 재

에 해당하는 제언은 다음에서 개별적으로 확인할 수 있다

위 표

는

가 제시하는 한국

정렬한 것이다 각 챕터

개발협력의 전략적 방향

정책 프레임워크의 개선 과제를 주요 주제 별로 재

에 해당하는 제언은 다음에서 개별적으로 확인할 수 있다

개발협력의 전략적 방향

한국 대외원조의 법적 정책적 체계

평가 결과 년

에 참여하는 모든 관

평가 결과 동료검토 당시 국내에는 개발협력 전반을 총괄하는 법률이 없던 상태로 통합적인

년

동료검토 당시 국내에는 개발협력 전반을 총괄하는 법률이 없던 상태로 통합적인

원조 정책과 전략 역시 마련되지 않았다 특히 기획재정부가 유상원조를 전담하고 외교통상부가

무상원조를 전담하게 되면서 생겨난 이원화된 원조 체계 하에 한국국제협력단 이하

국수출입은행 대외경제협력기금 이하

나 한

같은 주요 시행기관을 제외한 여러 정부기관 및 지방

국수출입은행 대외경제협력기금 이하

나 한

같은 주요 시행기관을 제외한 여러 정부기관 및 지방

자치단체들이 단체별 이해관계에 따라 산발적으로 원조사업에 참여하면서 사업의 중복이 발생하

고 원조의 효과성이 저해되는 등 심각한 원조 분절화의 문제가 해결해야 할 주요 문제로 거론된

바 있다

- 168 -

이에 정부는

년 국제개발협력기본법 과 국제개발협력기본법 시행령 을 제정하면서 한국 원조

의 법적인 근간을 구축해나가기 시작했다 기본법

조에 따라 국무총리실 산하에 국제개발협력위

원회와 개발협력정책관실을 신설했으며 분야별 기본계획안을 수립하였다 이어

년

월 국제

이에 정부는

년 국제개발협력기본법 과 국제개발협력기본법 시행령 을 제정하면서 한국 원조

의 법적인 근간을 구축해나가기 시작했다 기본법

조에 따라 국무총리실 산하에 국제개발협력위

원회와 개발협력정책관실을 신설했으며 분야별 기본계획안을 수립하였다 이어

년

월 국제

개발협력 선진화방안 을 수립하면서 대외원조의 전략과 추진방향을 설정해나가기 위한 토대를 마

련했다

그러나 이러한 법적 제도적 변화에도 불구하고

년 평가에서 주로 지적된 원조의 분절화 문제

는 해결되기는커녕 오히려 고착화되고 있다 이는 무엇보다도 한국의 개발협력 정책을 총괄 해야 할 국제개발협력위원회가 사후 사업 승인 및 보고 역할에만 그치면서 일원화 원조 정책과 전략을 고안하지 못하고 있기 때문이다 현재 유

조정

통합화된 대외

무상 전담 기관이 정책과 전략을

그러나 이러한 법적 제도적 변화에도 불구하고

년 평가에서 주로 지적된 원조의 분절화 문제

무상 전담 기관이 정책과 전략을

수립함에 있어 협상 채널은 존재하나 효과적인 협상이 이뤄지지 않고 있다

또한 최근 몇 년간

예산이 급격하게 증가하면서 개별 정부 기관의 깃발 꽂기 식 원조 사업

조정

통합화된 대외

예산이 급격하게 증가하면서 개별 정부 기관의 깃발 꽂기 식 원조 사업

참여가 대폭 증가했으나 이를 조율할 수 있는 일관된 원칙이 없어 분절화 문제가 심화되고 있다

사업의 중복 집행 및 채널의 다원화는 원조의 정책일관성을 떨어뜨리고 원조의 효과성을 저해하

며 국민의 세금으로 마련되는

예산 집행의 낭비를 초래한다

또한 선진화방안에서는 한국 원조를 선진화하기 위한 전략의 하나로 지식공유사업을 증대하고 한

국형 원조 모델을 개발할 것을 명시하고 있다 그러나 이는 자칫하면 대외원조의 본분을 망각하고

공여국 중심주의적 원조로 흘러갈 위험성을 내포한다 한국 정부는 공여국 중심주의를 벗어나 원

조 프로그램에 민주화 인권 성평등과 같은 보편적 가치를 반영하고 파트너국가의 수요

와

현지 상황을 최우선으로 고려하여 제공해야 한다

개선 과제

독립적인 국제개발청 혹은 전담 부처를 신설할 것

유

무상 원조 통합 목표 연도를 설정하고 연차별 추진방안을 마련할 것

유

무상 원조 통합 목표 연도를 설정하고 연차별 추진방안을 마련할 것

유

무상 주관기관 간의 협상 채널을 강화하고 분야별 기본계획 및 시행계획을 통합적으

유

무상 주관기관 간의 협상 채널을 강화하고 분야별 기본계획 및 시행계획을 통합적으

로 수립할 것

통합적이고 일원화된 한국 원조의 철학과 전략을 수립할 것

대외원조 기본계획 수립지침에 통합원조 지침을 명확히 명시할 것

선진화방안에 따라 무리하게 한국형 원조를 추진함으로써 대외원조가 공여국 중심주의로

흘러가지 않도록 할 것

한국의 원조 철학에 국제사회의 보편적 규범과 교훈을 반영할 것

핵심가치와 원칙을 수립하고 모든 과정과 단계에서 반영되도록 할 것

대중 인지제고와 시민사회와의 협력 강화

평가 결과 한국은

와

평가 결과 년 동료검토를 통해

에 대한 국민인식을 제고하기 위한 전략을 수립하고 시민사

회 및 학계와의 협력을 강화하고 지원을 확대할 것을 권고 받았다 야의 한국 시민사회의 수준을 높게 평가한 바 있다

- 169 -

은 당시 국제개발협력 분

한국은

년 동료검토를 통해

에 대한 국민인식을 제고하기 위한 전략을 수립하고 시민사

회 및 학계와의 협력을 강화하고 지원을 확대할 것을 권고 받았다 야의 한국 시민사회의 수준을 높게 평가한 바 있다

- 169 -

은 당시 국제개발협력 분

이에 한국 정부는

라는 온라인 홈페이지

를 개설하여 한국 원조

의 지원 현황과 관련 정보에 대해 제공하고 있다 또한 범정부 년 통합홍보계획을 마련했으며

에

홍보

를 구축함으로써

이에 한국 정부는

라는 온라인 홈페이지

를 개설하여 한국 원조

의 지원 현황과 관련 정보에 대해 제공하고 있다 또한 범정부

교육원을 설립하여 일반 국민들과 유관 관계

년 통합홍보계획을 마련했으며

에

홍보

를 구축함으로써

교육원을 설립하여 일반 국민들과 유관 관계

자들을 대상으로 개발협력 교육을 실시하고 있다 그밖에 국무총리실 산하의 국제개발협력위원회

실무위원회와 외교통상부 산하 정책자문위원회

자문위원회 등이 설치되어

정책자문

자문위원회 등이 설치되어

정책자문

위원회를 운영함으로써 시민사회 및 학계의 의견을 수렴하고 있다 이처럼 정부는 시민사회의 역

량강화 및 협력 전략을 개발하고 참여를 확대하기 위한 노력을 꾀하고 있다

홈페이지 개설로 인해 국민들이 것은 매우 고무적인 일이다 그러나 한국 유

에 관한 기초 정보들에 쉽게 접근할 수 있게 된

홈페이지 개설로 인해 국민들이

의 세부 예산안이나 특정 사업의 평가 결

것은 매우 고무적인 일이다 그러나 한국 유

무상

에 관한 기초 정보들에 쉽게 접근할 수 있게 된 무상

의 세부 예산안이나 특정 사업의 평가 결

과와 같은 주요 정보들에 대해서는 일부 공개 및 비공개 방침에 따라 매우 제한적인 정보만을 제

공하고 있다 또한

에 대한 국민적 합의와 이해를 구하기 위한 실제 홍보 노력은 미미하다는

점은 여전히 한계점으로 보인다

년까지

의 규모를

대비

까지 확대할 것을 약

에 대한 국민적 합의와 이해를 구하기 위한 실제 홍보 노력은 미미하다는

점은 여전히 한계점으로 보인다

년까지

의 규모를

대비

까지 확대할 것을 약

속한 바에 따라 정부가 원조 금액의 증대에 대해 국민들에게 알리고 동의를 구하는 것은 매우 중

요하다

시민사회의 참여 역시 여러 위원회를 구성하면서 의견을 수렴하기 위한 장치는 마련하였으나 아

직 소수의 전문가들에게만 선별적으로 협의 과정에 참여할 수 있는 기회가 제공됨으로써 다양한

층위의 민간 참여자들이 목소리를 낼 수 있는 공적인 장은 여전히 부족하다 정부가 시민사회와의

협력의 필요성에 대해서는 인지를 하게 된 것으로 보이지만 협력의 형태 내용 면에서는 소극적인

수준에 머물러 있다 개발협력 정책 수립을 위한 국내의 협의 과정에서 시민사회를 적극적인 협력

대상이자 동등한 주체로 인식하는 노력이 필요하다

또한 아래 표를 보면

를 통한 정부의 원조 비중이 기타

회원국들에 비해 매우 낮은 수

또한 아래 표를 보면

를 통한 정부의 원조 비중이 기타

회원국들에 비해 매우 낮은 수

준임을 확인할 수 있다 한국 정부는 정책결정과정에 있어 공식적인 민간의견수렴의 기회를 확대

하고 여기에 민간의 참여를 독려하여 시민사회의 의견을 적극적으로 수렴하여야 한다

표

양자원조 중

지원 비율

표

양자원조 중

구분 회원국 전체 평균

한국

개선 과제 국민들에게

지원 비율

개선 과제 에 대한 인지제고 및 홍보를 강화할 것

인지제고를 위한 기초적인 정보뿐만 아니라 원조예산

국민들에게 국별협력전략

중점지

원국가 및 선정 이유 사전 사후평가결과 등과 같은 주요 정보를 반드시 공개할 것 정책결정과정에 공식적인 민간의견수렴의 기회를 마련하고

인지제고를 위한 기초적인 정보뿐만 아니라 원조예산

국별협력전략

중점지

원국가 및 선정 이유 사전 사후평가결과 등과 같은 주요 정보를 반드시 공개할 것

민간 참여를 확대할

것

에 대한 인지제고 및 홍보를 강화할 것

정책결정과정에 공식적인 민간의견수렴의 기회를 마련하고

민간 참여를 확대할

것 민간을 핵심적인 파트너로 인식하고 기획 실행 평가 전 과정에서의 참여를 보장

할 것

민간을 핵심적인 파트너로 인식하고 기획 실행 평가 전 과정에서의 참여를 보장 할 것

소수의 전문가 외에 다양한 층위의 민간 전문가들의 참여 범위를 넓힐 것

시민사회를 통한 민간원조를 대폭 확대할 것

- 170 -

원조를 넘어 개발

개발을 위한 정책일관성

평가 결과

년 동료검토 시 개발을 위한 정책일관성 에서 독립적으로 평가되지 않은 채

파트는

년 동료검토 시 개발을 위한 정책일관성

에 포함되어 간략하게 다뤄진 바 있다 이는

에서 독립적으로 평가되지 않은 채

파트는 에 포함되어 간략하게 다뤄진 바 있다 이는

당시 정책일관성 개념이 정립되지 않았고 평가를 받을 정도로 발전되지 않은 영역이었기 때문이

다

에서 평가 시 일반적으로 정책일관성에 관련된 부분 중

것에 반해

가지 영역을 선발하여 평가하는

년 당시에는 정책일관성의 개념에 대한 인지와 고려가 필요하다는 점만이 지적됐

에서 평가 시 일반적으로 정책일관성에 관련된 부분 중

것에 반해

가지 영역을 선발하여 평가하는

년 당시에는 정책일관성의 개념에 대한 인지와 고려가 필요하다는 점만이 지적됐

다 올해 정식 검토를 받는 한국은 무역 이민 환경 세가지 영역에 대한 정책일관성 평가를 받는

다

다 년 현재 개발을 위한 정책일관성에 대한 연구는 부분적으로 이루어지고 있지만 범정부 차원

년 현재 개발을 위한 정책일관성에 대한 연구는 부분적으로 이루어지고 있지만 범정부 차원

에서의 정책일관성에 대한 종합적 정책은 수립되지 않았다 개발협력 정책 내 일관성도 확보되지

않은 채 분절적으로 진행되는 상태이며 원조와 개발에 관련한 영역 간의 정책 일관성은 개념에

대한 논의조차 충분히 이뤄지지 않고 있다 분절화 문제를 해결하기 전까지 여러 영역 간의 정책

일관성에 대해 논의하고 연구하는 것은 아직 시기상조라는 학계 및 시민사회의 의견도 많다

무역 분야의 정책일관성 한국은

무역 분야의 정책일관성

협정의 무관세 무쿼터

이행을 위해

년부터 최빈국 수입

한국은

협정의 무관세 무쿼터

이행을 위해

년부터 최빈국 수입

품에 대해 최빈 개도국에 대한 특혜관세 공여 규정 에 따라 무관세 혜택을 부여하고 있다 관세

특혜 공여 현황은

년

에서

년

으로 증가했으나 여전히

합의 기준인

에는

년

에서

년

으로 증가했으나 여전히

합의 기준인

에는

미치지 못한다 또한 최빈국의 핵심 수출품목인 원유 석유제품 쌀 소고기 등을 국내산업을 보호

하기 위해 공여대상에서 제외함으로써 결국 한국의 시장개방이 최빈 개도국에게 실질적인 도움이

된다고 보기는 어렵다

또한

대비 높은 한국의 농업보조금도 문제다 이는 무역을 위한 원조

를 통한

또한

대비 높은 한국의 농업보조금도 문제다 이는 무역을 위한 원조

를 통한

최빈 개도국 및 개도국의 빈곤감소와 경제성장을 위한 지원의 의미를 퇴색시킨다 이러한 정책적

비일관성의 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 무역을 위한 원조를 담당하는

와

뿐만 아니라

와

뿐만 아니라

한국의 다른 관련 부처의 외교 및 통상 등의 제반정책 모두를 포괄하는 범정부적인 논의의 장을

구성할 필요가 있다 또한 한국 정부는

년 도하

개발의제에서 결의한 농업부분에 있어

서의 모든 종류의 수출 보조금을 점진적으로 철폐하겠다는 약속을 이행해야 할 것이다 환경 분야의 정책일관성 표한 바 있다 이에 따라 녹색 년

개발의제에서 결의한 농업부분에 있어

환경 분야의 정책일관성

한국 정부는 대통령 직속기구로 녹색성장위원회를 설치한 이후 년

년 도하

서의 모든 종류의 수출 보조금을 점진적으로 철폐하겠다는 약속을 이행해야 할 것이다

년

를 추진하기 위해

년 녹색성장

개년계획을 발

파트너국의 녹색성장 관련 사업비를

로 확대하기로 결정했다 그러나 이러한 원조사업에는

대강 및

한국 정부는 대통령 직속기구로 녹색성장위원회를 설치한 이후 표한 바 있다 이에 따라 녹색 년

년

를 추진하기 위해

년 녹색성장

개년계획을 발

파트너국의 녹색성장 관련 사업비를

로 확대하기로 결정했다 그러나 이러한 원조사업에는

대강 및

청계천 사업과 유사한 물관리분야 지원사업 및 원자력 수출 사업 등 국내에서도 환경 파괴 논란을

동반하며 사전 환경 영향 평가

가 확실히 이뤄지지 않은 불완전한 사업이 포함되어 있다 이

는 파트너국가에 미칠 영향은 고려하지 않은 채 현지사정에 관계없이 일방적으로 이식하는 원조가

될 위험이 크다

- 171 -

이민 분야의 정책일관성

한국의 이민 정책을 주관하는 곳은 외국인정책위원회로 외교통상부 노동부 보건복지부 등 다수

부처가 분산 수행하고 있는 정책을 총괄 조정하는 역할을 담당하고 있다 그러나 해당 부처 역시

재원배분권을 가지고 있지 않은 한계로 중재 조정의 기능을 원활하게 수행하지 못하고 있다 외국

인 정책 기본계획에서는 선진적인 난민 지원 시스템을 구축하겠다고 밝히고 있으나 여전히 국내

신청자들에게 소송 기간 동안 실질적인 생계지원을 제공하지 않고 있으며 공항에서의 난민 신청

접수 거부가 잦고 고문 등의 위험이 있는 곳으로 난민신청자를 강제 송환하는 등 상당히 열악하

다 정부가 추진하는 통합적 이민 정책은 두 외국인 전략

으로 이는 국

익에 도움이 되는 고급인력은 적극적으로 수용하는 반면 단순노무인력과 불법체류자들은 통제 관

리하거나 추방하며 배제시키는 것을 지칭한다

개선 과제

전략 환경 평가

를 마련하고 환경 영향 평가

를 강화할 것

전략 환경 평가

를 마련하고 환경 영향 평가

를 강화할 것

개발을 위한 정책일관성을 담보할 수 있도록 관련 정책과 법제를 마련할 것

녹색

집행 시 개도국의 실제 필요와 현지 사정에 맞춰서 계획을 수립할 것

부처 간 협력 부재로 인한 예산 낭비를 해결하고 이민청을 설립하되 외국인 문제를 출입 국통제 관점에서 접근하는 법무부 산하에 두지 말 것

집행 시 개도국의 실제 필요와 현지 사정에 맞춰서 계획을 수립할 것

부처 간 협력 부재로 인한 예산 낭비를 해결하고 이민청을 설립하되 외국인 문제를 출입 국통제 관점에서 접근하는 법무부 산하에 두지 말 것

유엔 이주노동자 협약에 가입할 것

최빈국 특혜관세에 해당하는 공여품목을 확대할 것

정책 비일관성을 해결하기 위해 무역을 위한 원조

에 참여하는 모든 관련

부처를 대상으로 범정부적인 논의의 장을 구성할 것 년 도하

정책 비일관성을 해결하기 위해 무역을 위한 원조

에 참여하는 모든 관련

부처를 대상으로 범정부적인 논의의 장을 구성할 것

개발의제에서 결의한 바와 같이 농업 분야의 모든 수출 보조금을 점진

적으로 철폐하기로 한 약속을 이행할 것

년 도하

개발의제에서 결의한 바와 같이 농업 분야의 모든 수출 보조금을 점진

적으로 철폐하기로 한 약속을 이행할 것

원조 규모 채널 분배

원조 규모와 채널 분배

평가 결과

년 한국의 대외원조는 전체 규모가 작고 원조 채널이 매우 복잡하며 배분 구조와 기준이 불

명확한 점을 지적받았다 이 결과 무상원조를 확대하고 최빈국에 대한 지원을 확대하며 중점협력

국을 축소하고 다자원조에 대한 종합적인 전략을 수립할 것을 권고 받은 바 있다

원조 규모 증대

세계경제위기로 인해 선진 공여국들이 원조예산을 삭감하고 있는 실정에서 한국 정부가 원조 규

모 확대를 위한 의지를 확고히 하고 있는 것은 상당히 고무적이다 한국 정부는 지난

년 부산

모 확대를 위한 의지를 확고히 하고 있는 것은 상당히 고무적이다 한국 정부는 지난

년 부산

세계개발원조총회를 비롯한 여러 국제회의에서

까지 증

세계개발원조총회를 비롯한 여러 국제회의에서

까지 증

년까지

규모를

가시키겠다는 약속을 거듭 재표명한 바 있다 그러나 한국 원조의 규모는 위 수준으로 세계

위 경제 규모

이 사실이다 게다가 지난

년

상황이다 물가상승률을 고려하면

대비

개 회원국 중

위의 무역 규모에 비하면 공여 초기의 규모가 워낙 작았던 것 년 모두 정부가 계획했던 년까지

비율을 달성하지 못한

목표 달성은 더욱 어려워 보인다

- 172 -

년까지

규모를

가시키겠다는 약속을 거듭 재표명한 바 있다 그러나 한국 원조의 규모는 위 수준으로 세계

위 경제 규모

이 사실이다 게다가 지난

년

상황이다 물가상승률을 고려하면

대비

개 회원국 중

위의 무역 규모에 비하면 공여 초기의 규모가 워낙 작았던 것 년 모두 정부가 계획했던 년까지

비율을 달성하지 못한

목표 달성은 더욱 어려워 보인다

- 172 -

무상원조 비율 확대 대부분의

무상원조 비율 확대

회원국들이 무상원조 중심으로

를 제공하는 반면 한국의 유상원조 비율은 여

전히 높으며 오히려

년에 비해 그 비율이 증가하고 있는 추세이다

억달러 가 전년대비

감소한 반면 유상원조

억달러 는 전년대비

협력 선진화 방안에 따르면 정부는 유상원조의 비율을 원조의

년에는 무상원조 증가했다 국제개발

년까지 순지출을 기준으로 전체 양자

내외로 유지할 예정이므로 앞으로도 유상원조의 비율이 높게 유지될 가능성이 매우

대부분의

회원국들이 무상원조 중심으로

전히 높으며 오히려

년에 비해 그 비율이 증가하고 있는 추세이다

억달러 가 전년대비

감소한 반면 유상원조

원조의

중점협력국 축소

선정했다 그러나 정부는 통합

수립 대상국가인

무상 통합된

개 중점 협력국을

개 중점협력국가의 전체 명단을 외교 관계

년에는 무상원조 증가했다 국제개발

년까지 순지출을 기준으로 전체 양자

내외로 유지할 예정이므로 앞으로도 유상원조의 비율이 높게 유지될 가능성이 매우

높다고 볼 수 있다

의 권고에 따라 유

억달러 는 전년대비

협력 선진화 방안에 따르면 정부는 유상원조의 비율을

높다고 볼 수 있다

한국 정부는 중점협력국 수를 줄이라는

를 제공하는 반면 한국의 유상원조 비율은 여

한국 정부는 중점협력국 수를 줄이라는 선정했다 그러나 정부는 통합

의 권고에 따라 유

수립 대상국가인

무상 통합된

개 중점 협력국을

개 중점협력국가의 전체 명단을 외교 관계

에서 갈등이 발생할 수 있다는 이유로 대외비로 하고 있다 또한 선정 기준과 절차에 대해서도 공

개하지 않고 있다 중점협력국 선정과 관련한 최근 카메룬

다이아몬드 스캔들은 한국 정부

가 원조를 국익추구의 수단으로 이용하고 있는 것은 아닌지 오해와 의심을 가져올 수 있음을 보여

주었다

중점 지원 분야 선정 축소

검토 결과 한국 원조의 중점 지원 분야를 줄일 것을 권고 받았음에도 불구하고 한국의 중점 지원

분야는 여전히 포괄적이고 불명확하다는 한계를 지니고 있다 현재 한국의 주요 지원분야는 크게

교육 인적 자원

보건 행정

의 범분야 이슈로 나뉜다 료 복지부

경제

또한 선진화 방안에 따르면 개발협력의 콘텐츠로 경제 재정부

인적자원 교과 고용부

건설 국토부

농업 산업에너지 국토개발 및 환경 녹색성장 과 여성 등

산업에너지 지경부

행정・

행안 법무 방통 지경부

환경 환경부 등 원조수요가 많은

농어업 농식품 행안부

보건의 국토

대 분야가 주로 거론된다 그

보건 행정

의 범분야 이슈로 나뉜다 료 복지부

경제

또한 선진화 방안에 따르면 개발협력의 콘텐츠로 경제 재정부

인적자원 교과 고용부

건설 국토부

농업 산업에너지 국토개발 및 환경 녹색성장 과 여성 등

산업에너지 지경부

행정・

행안 법무 방통 지경부

환경 환경부 등 원조수요가 많은

농어업 농식품 행안부

보건의 국토

대 분야가 주로 거론된다 그

러나 이는 개발협력의 거의 모든 분야에 해당하는 것이므로 특별히 중점 지원 분야가 축소되었다

고 보기 어렵다

개선 과제

선진국들의 평균 수준 년까지

대비

평균

대비

까지 원조 규모를 확대할 것

라는 증액 약속 달성을 위한 구체적인 실행 계획을 마

련할 것

선진국들의 평균 수준 년까지

대비

평균

대비

까지 원조 규모를 확대할 것

라는 증액 약속 달성을 위한 구체적인 실행 계획을 마

련할 것

의 규범 및 국제사회의 추세에 맞춰 무상원조 비율을 대폭 확대할 것

최빈국에 대한 유상원조를 폐지하고 무상원조 비율을 확대할 것

중점협력국 선정 기준 및 결과를 투명하게 공개할 것

최빈국들을 중심으로 중점협력국을 선정하여

한 목적으로

의 근본 목표인 빈곤 퇴치를 위

예산을 사용할 것

한 목적으로

한국의 비교우위를 명확하게 파악함으로써 원조 분야의 선택과 집중을 할 것

기준

예산을 사용할 것

한국의 비교우위를 명확하게 파악함으로써 원조 분야의 선택과 집중을 할 것

기준

- 173 -

의 근본 목표인 빈곤 퇴치를 위

- 173 -

조직과 관리

관계 부처 및 기관 간 조율 협력과 통합

수립

관계 부처 및 기관 간 조율 협력과 통합

평가 결과

관계 부처 기관 간 조율 협력

앞서

에서 언급한 바와 같이 원조 정책 간 집행 간 그리고 정책과 집행 간의 분절성 및

총괄 기능의 부재는 유

무상 원조 간의 분절화가 극심해지고 특히 무상원조 내의 분절화 문제를

심화시키는 요인이 되고 있다 산하기관이

년 총리실 전수조사 기준으로 총

개 부처

기관과

개 집행

개 사업을 분산적으로 실시하고 있으며 기획재정부와 수출입은행을 제외한

개

앞서

수립

에서 언급한 바와 같이 원조 정책 간 집행 간 그리고 정책과 집행 간의 분절성 및

총괄 기능의 부재는 유

무상 원조 간의 분절화가 극심해지고 특히 무상원조 내의 분절화 문제를

심화시키는 요인이 되고 있다 산하기관이

년 총리실 전수조사 기준으로 총

개 부처

기관과

개 집행

개 사업을 분산적으로 실시하고 있으며 기획재정부와 수출입은행을 제외한

개

기관이 모두 무상원조에 참여하고 있다 또한 외교부 산하의 무상원조협의회의 경우에도 실효성이

크지 않기에 중복 사업이 발생하고 있으며 특히 초청인수와 인력파견 분야의 중복 문제가 가장

심각하다 특히 국내 개별 기관이 파트너국가의 총괄 부처가 아닌 유관 부처에 산발적으로 접촉함

으로 인해 행정 비용을 증가시키고 지속가능성을 담보할 수 없는 사업의 수만을 늘려나가고 있다

통합 지난 는

수립

통합

년 협력대상국별 국별원조전략을 수립하는 것이 필요하다는 권고를 바탕으로 한국 정부 년까지 이하

개 모든 중점협력국 별로 유

무상 통합 국가협력전략

는

를 수립하겠다는 계획을 발표했다 현재 베트남 가나 솔로몬 군도

당하는

가 수립이 완료되어

그러나

를 수립하는 과정을 살펴보면

가 각 개별 국가의 발전에 진정한 도

년 협력대상국별 국별원조전략을 수립하는 것이 필요하다는 권고를 바탕으로 한국 정부 년까지

개국에 해

홈페이지를 통해 일부 공개된 상태이다 개국에 대한

지난

수립

이하

개 모든 중점협력국 별로 유

무상 통합 국가협력전략

를 수립하겠다는 계획을 발표했다 현재 베트남 가나 솔로몬 군도

당하는

가 수립이 완료되어

그러나

를 수립하는 과정을 살펴보면

개국에 해

홈페이지를 통해 일부 공개된 상태이다 개국에 대한

가 각 개별 국가의 발전에 진정한 도

움을 줄 수 있을 것인지 의문을 자아낸다 일반적으로 타 공여국들의 경우 기존에 존재하는 국별

지원전략을 발전시키는 데

년 정도를 투자하는 데 비해 한국은

년 안에

개의

를 수립하

려다 보니 파트너국가에 대한 충분한 조사와 분석이 미흡할 수 있을 우려가 있다 특히 유 으로 분절화된 구조 하에서 작성되는

무상

는 통합이라는 이름이 무색하게도 각 부처 및 기관 별로

년 정도를 투자하는 데 비해 한국은

년 안에

개의

를 수립하

려다 보니 파트너국가에 대한 충분한 조사와 분석이 미흡할 수 있을 우려가 있다 특히 유 으로 분절화된 구조 하에서 작성되는

무상

는 통합이라는 이름이 무색하게도 각 부처 및 기관 별로

작성할 국가가 나눠진 채 개별적으로 만들어지고 있다 작성 후 부처 별로 회람후 보완이 이뤄진

다고 해도 본래 통합

부가 작성하는 야별

의 의미를 퇴색시키는 것이다 또한 주관 부처인 기획재정부와 외교통상

를 제외하고도 농림수산부 교육과학기술부와 같은 개별 부처가 독자적으로 분

를 수립하고 있는 것 또한 전략의 일관성 측면에서 문제가 될 수 있다

수립 시 시

민사회 및 학계와의 공적인 의견수렴과정이 보장되지 않는다는 점도 개선되어야 할 부분이다

개선 과제

부가 작성하는 야별

의 의미를 퇴색시키는 것이다 또한 주관 부처인 기획재정부와 외교통상

를 제외하고도 농림수산부 교육과학기술부와 같은 개별 부처가 독자적으로 분

를 수립하고 있는 것 또한 전략의 일관성 측면에서 문제가 될 수 있다

민사회 및 학계와의 공적인 의견수렴과정이 보장되지 않는다는 점도 개선되어야 할 부분이다

개선 과제

여 개의 무상 유상원조 실시 기관을 통합할 것

국제기구와 다자은행을 통한 원조를 통합할 것

국정감사 등 국회의 대외원조정책 감시기능을 강화할 것

각 부처가 개별적으로 분야별

통합

수립 시 시

만드는 것을 지양할 것

수립을 위해 주관부처 및 시행기관 국별 지역전문가 학계 및 시민사회

전문가들이 참여하는 범정부적인 국가지원전략 전문가회의를 설치 운영할 것 수립 관련 정보를 적극 공개하여 원조 투명성과 책임성을 제고할 것 파트너국의 우선순위와 정책을

에 적극 반영할 것

- 174 -

통합

만드는 것을 지양할 것

수립을 위해 주관부처 및 시행기관 국별 지역전문가 학계 및 시민사회

에 적극 반영할 것

- 174 -

효과적 원조관리를 위한 인력 확보와 모니터링 및 평가

평가 결과

효과적 원조관리를 위한 인력 확보

무상원조 시행 기관인

는

년

전문기관으로의 도약을 위한 로드맵

월 제시된

견할 예정이다 현재

년 기준

글로벌

무상원조 시행 기관인

을 통해 전략적 사업수행체계 구축을 위한 전략을 제

시하고 현장 중심 조직 개편을 단행했다 이를 통해 를 세워 실행 중이며

선진화 계획 년까지

인 현장 인력을

여명의 인력 확충을 위한 목표

년까지 전체 인력의

년

전문기관으로의 도약을 위한 로드맵

월 제시된

를 세워 실행 중이며

는 현장화 방안을 마련하고 있으나 원조효과성 제고를 위해 현지 위

견할 예정이다 현재

년 기준

선진화 계획

글로벌

을 통해 전략적 사업수행체계 구축을 위한 전략을 제

시하고 현장 중심 조직 개편을 단행했다 이를 통해

까지 확대 파

주의 원조운영이 가능하도록 뒷받침할 체계는 아직 구성되지 못한 상황이다

는

년까지

인 현장 인력을

여명의 인력 확충을 위한 목표

년까지 전체 인력의

까지 확대 파

는 현장화 방안을 마련하고 있으나 원조효과성 제고를 위해 현지 위

주의 원조운영이 가능하도록 뒷받침할 체계는 아직 구성되지 못한 상황이다

모니터링 및 평가 활성화

년 동료검토 시 한국은 독립적인 평가문화를 구축하고 공동 평가 가이드라인을 수립하며 평 가결과를 사업에 반영할 것을 권고 받은 바 있다 이에 정부는 략 사업 전반에 대한 통합평가를 실시한 뒤 이를 바탕으로

년 시범적으로

정책 전

년부터 본격적으로 통합평가 가이

년 시범적으로

정책 전

년부터 본격적으로 통합평가 가이

드라인을 마련하고 평가를 본격적으로 실시하려 준비 중에 있다 현재 국제개발협력위원회 아래

통합평가소위가 통합평가를 주관하며

와

는 자체 및 외부 평가를 실시한다

와

는 자체 및 외부 평가를 실시한다

이와 같은 통합평가를 위한 정부의 노력을 바탕으로 그간 한국의 평가 문화는 발전하고 실제 평

가 사례가 증가해왔다 그러나 평가 결과가 실제 차기 사업에 반영되는 환류가 제대로 이뤄지고

있는지에 대해서는 긍정적인 평가를 내리기 어렵다 또한 정부기관 외에 평가를 실시하는 기관의

수도 많지 않고 평가의 역사가 길지 않은 탓에 독립적인 평가를 실시할 역량을 지닌 기관이 충분

하지 않으며 평가의 질에도 한계가 존재한다

개선 과제

원조효과성을 제고하기 위한 방향으로 현장 체계를 강화할 것

파트너국가의 해외 공관 및

해외사무소를 통해 각 부처 및 기관의 산발적

인 원조를 조정할 것 내

파트너국가의 해외 공관 및

해외사무소를 통해 각 부처 및 기관의 산발적

인 원조를 조정할 것

외부 사전 영향평가 및 사후평가에 대한 지속적인 투자를 통해 평가의 질을

제고할 것

내

외부 사전 영향평가 및 사후평가에 대한 지속적인 투자를 통해 평가의 질을

제고할 것

민간이 참여하는 독립적인 평가 시스템을 마련하고 이를 강화할 것

평가의 결과가 향후 반영될 수 있도록 보장하는 환류 시스템을 마련할 것

모니터링 및 평가 과정에 시민사회의 참여를 확대할 것

평가 결과를 공개함으로써 책무성을 강화하고 개선 의지를 확고하게 증명할 것

- 175 -

원조효과성

원조효과성 아젠다 및 비구속성 원조 비율

평가 결과

년 동료검토에서 한국은 파리선언의 원조효과성 의제를 충실히 이행할 것을 권고 받았다 또 한 파리선언 이행현황 모니터링 조사에 참여할 것과 파리선언의

대 원칙에 따라 주인의식 증대

와 원조일치 원조조화 확대를 위한 적극적인 노력을 요구받았다 그 중에서도 비구속성 원조비율

을 늘리고 특히 최빈국에 대한 원조 비구속화가 확대되어야 함이 강력하게 제시되었다

이에 한국정부는 최근

스 채택 주도

년간

년

개발원조위원회

가입과

서울 개발컨센서

년 부산 세계개발원조총회를 성공적으로 개최하면서 국제사회의 원조효과성 제

고뿐만이 아니라 한국의 원조효과성을 높이기 위한 노력을 꾸준히 이행해왔다

권고사항대로

스 채택 주도

년간

년

개발원조위원회

가입과

서울 개발컨센서

년 부산 세계개발원조총회를 성공적으로 개최하면서 국제사회의 원조효과성 제

고뿐만이 아니라 한국의 원조효과성을 높이기 위한 노력을 꾸준히 이행해왔다

권고사항대로

에 가입하기 전 비회원국으로서는 유일하게 파리선언 이행현황 모니터링 설문조사

에 참여하였으며 원조효과성을 높이기 위한 파리선언의

대 원칙을 부분적으로 이행하였다

가장 큰 변화는 앞서 밝힌 것처럼 국제개발협력기본법 및 시행령 선진화 방안 등 개발협력정책의

법적 근간을 다지면서 협력대상국의 개발 우선순위를 반영한

를 수립하여 주인의식 및 원조예

측성을 강화하기 위해 노력했다는 것이다 하지만 원조의 비구속화 노력은 여전히 부족하다 파리

선언의 비구속화 목표치가

다 그러나 한국은

년 기준

이며

가입국가의 비구속화 비율이 평균 에 그쳤다

이

년까지 원조 비구속성 비율을

할 것을 목표로 하고 있는 한국 정부가 목표치를 달성한다고 하더라도 이는

까지 확대 회원국에 비해

다 그러나 한국은

년 기준

이며

가입국가의 비구속화 비율이 평균 에 그쳤다

이

년까지 원조 비구속성 비율을

할 것을 목표로 하고 있는 한국 정부가 목표치를 달성한다고 하더라도 이는

까지 확대 회원국에 비해

낮은 수치이다 보다 적극적인 이행 노력이 필요하다

원조효과성 의제에 대해 한국원조의 성적이 낮은 것은 국제사회의 평가에서도 여실히 드러났다

년에 이어

년 파리선언 모니터링 설문조사 결과에서 주인의식과 원조일치에 해당하는 파

트너 국가의 공공재정관리시스템의 활용 정도는 미달하였다

에 불과해 다른 공여기관의 평균

년도 결과 보고서에 따르면 한국은 총

개 목표 중

에 크게

번 지표에 해당하는 조화

년에 이어

년 파리선언 모니터링 설문조사 결과에서 주인의식과 원조일치에 해당하는 파

트너 국가의 공공재정관리시스템의 활용 정도는 미달하였다

에 불과해 다른 공여기관의 평균

년도 결과 보고서에 따르면 한국은 총

개 목표 중

에 크게

번 지표에 해당하는 조화

로운 지원을 통한 역량강화 목표 하나만을 달성하여 전체적으로 매우 낮은 평가를 받았다 또한

미국의 국제경제개발연구소

와 국제개발센터 가 발간한

질적평가보고서

에서도 한국원조의 효율성

와 국제개발센터 가 발간한

질적평가보고서

에서도 한국원조의 효율성

과 파트너 국가의 행정부담 경감 노력에서 최하위권의 성적을 받았다 한국의 원조분절화가 현행

대로 유지된다면 향후 파트너 국가 부담 경감 부분에 대해서는 좋은 점수를 받기 어려울 것으로

보인다

개선 과제

파트너 국가와의 충분한 협의를 통해 이들의 개발 수요와 우선순위에 대한 집중적 지원을

기반으로 하는

를 수립하여 파트너국가의 주인의식 강화에 기여할 것

중기 원조집행계획을 수립 파트너 국가와 공유하여 원조 예측성을 높이고 파트너 국가의

개발계획 및 정책 수립 역량 강화에 기여할 것

무상뿐만이 아니라 유상원조의 비구속성 비율을 확대하여

년까지 구속성 원조를 단계

적으로 폐지할 것

무상뿐만이 아니라 유상원조의 비구속성 비율을 확대하여

년까지 구속성 원조를 단계

적으로 폐지할 것

파트너국가의 공공재정관리 시스템 활용도를

회원국 평균 수준으로 확대할 것

- 176 -

파트너국가의 공공재정관리 시스템 활용도를

회원국 평균 수준으로 확대할 것

- 176 -

여개의 유

무상 원조실시 기관을 통합하여 원조분절화로 인한 파트너 국가의 행정 부

여개의 유

무상 원조실시 기관을 통합하여 원조분절화로 인한 파트너 국가의 행정 부

담을 줄이고 일원화된 정책 수립과 사업을 추진할 것

다른 공여국과 공통의 행정 절차 시스템을 활용하고 공동 현지조사 및 국가분석 작업에

적극적으로 참여하여 원조조화 노력을 강화할 것

인도적 지원

인도적 지원 및 다자원조 채널 확대

평가 결과

인도적 지원에 대한

년 검토는 한페이지 내외로 기술되었을 정도로 당시 관련한 논의 수준

인도적 지원에 대한

년 검토는 한페이지 내외로 기술되었을 정도로 당시 관련한 논의 수준

및 정책 마련 수준은 상당히 미비했다 그러나 지금까지도 한국에는 인도적 지원 전반에 대한 정

책이나 법적인 기반이 마련되지 않은 상태이며 인도적 지원 자체에 대한 연구 역시 충분히 이뤄

지지 않고 있다 반면 다자원조 채널 활용을 확대하라는 권고에 대해서는 지원 비율 및 절대적 금

액이 증가됨으로써 상당 부분이 이행됐다

또한 동료검토에서 제기된 권고 사항은 아니지만 한국 정부는 지난

년 평가에서 간략히 언급

된 바 있는 선진 인도적 지원 공여국 협의회 에 가입했다 발표를 통해

의

년

월

이하

년도 선진 인도적 지원 공여국 협의회 연례회의 에서 공식

번째 회원국이 되었음은 고무적인 부분으로 평가할 수 있다

또한 동료검토에서 제기된 권고 사항은 아니지만 한국 정부는 지난

년 평가에서 간략히 언급

된 바 있는 선진 인도적 지원 공여국 협의회 에 가입했다 발표를 통해

의

년

월

이하

년도 선진 인도적 지원 공여국 협의회 연례회의 에서 공식

번째 회원국이 되었음은 고무적인 부분으로 평가할 수 있다

현재 한국에는 해외 긴급구호에 관한 법률 및 해외 긴급구호 선진화 방안이 제정된 상태이다 그

러나 이를 포함하는 상위 법률인 인도적 지원에 관한 정책과 법률 일체는 아직 수립된 바가 없다

여러 현황을 고려해봤을 때 인도적 지원에 관한 정책 수립을 위한 논의가 충분하게 이뤄지지는 않

은 것으로 보이며 앞으로 발전이 더욱 요구되는 부분이다

또한 긴급구호 상황에 대한 지원의 주체가 정부 민간 지방단체 등 분절화되어 있는 현황도 인도

적 지원의 효과성을 저해하는 가장 큰 요소 중 하나이다 국제사회의 전반적인 규범에서는 일괄적

인 지원의 필요성을 강조하고 있으므로 이에 상응하기 위해 긴급구호에 관한 원조를 제공함에 있

어 단일화된 채널을 마련하는 것은 매우 시급한 문제이다

또한 한국은 인도적 지원을 제공함에 있어 복합재난 혹은 만성재난에 대한 지원보다는 주로 긴급

재난에 대응하는 경향을 보인다 지원의 지속가능성을 높이고 폭을 넓히기 위해서는 재난의 다양

한 범주를 인식할 필요가 있다

다자원조 채널을 통한 지원의 경우 인도적 지원 관련 분석을 바탕으로 매년 평가 보고서를 발표

하는 국제 단체인

로 크게 증가한 것을 알 수 있다

의 보고서에 따르면 이를 통해

년도

에서

년도

년 권고 사항 중 하나로 제기되었던 다자

원조 채널 확대는 다소 긍정적으로 이행되고 있다고 판단된다 선진 공여국들의 인도적 지원 원칙과 행위의 책무성 있는 실천을 위해 입하고 있으며 회원국들은 모두 가입이 되어 있음 의 원칙 및 정책과 실행에 관한 책무성을 약속하고 있는데 중립에 기반한 인도적 지원을 하여야 함

- 177 -

년도에 출범한 협의체로서 현재 총 개국이 가 원칙에 가입되어 있는 공여국가들은 기본적으로 가입국가는 공정하고 필요에 근거하며 정치적

로 크게 증가한 것을 알 수 있다

의 보고서에 따르면 이를 통해

년도

에서

년도

년 권고 사항 중 하나로 제기되었던 다자

- 177 -

년도에 출범한 협의체로서 현재 총 개국이 가 원칙에 가입되어 있는 공여국가들은 기본적으로 가입국가는 공정하고 필요에 근거하며 정치적

개선 과제

인도적 지원에 관한 정책수립 및 법적 기반을 마련할 것

복합재난 혹은 만성재난 같이 재난의 다양한 범주에 대한 인식을 바탕으로 폭넓은 지

원을 제공할 것

참고자료

참고자료 외

보도자료

대 국회에서 다루어야 할

대

개혁과제

이제는 원조의 질이다 개발공헌지수

조

외 상세 분석

와 한국 개발원조의 부끄러운 현실 연재 현재 연재

원

지난

질적 변화 연재 호 의 규모와 배분 방식의 변화 추이

년 동안 한국의

는 어떻게 변화했나

지난 년 동안 한국의 연재 호

는 어떻게 변화했나

조

외

현재 연재

호

관계부처 합동 관계부처 합동

의 규모와 배분 방식의 변화 추이

참여연대

외

년

경희대 국제개발협력연구센터

관계부처 합동 무상협력 사업을 중심으로 최수영 참여연대 제고 방안

는 어떻게 변화했나

전문기관으로의 도약을 위한 로드맵

국제개발협력 년

무상협력 사업을 중심으로 덴마크 및 미국에 대한

동료 검토의 시사점

정책의 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 의견서 한국의 개발을 위한 정책일관성

제고 방안

펴낸이 이태주

글쓴이

팀 서울시 마포구 서교동

번지

글쓴이 층

주소

전화

팩스

홈페이지

- 178 -

한국

년 국제개발협력 종합시행계획

경희대 국제개발협력연구센터

펴낸이 이태주 주소

지난 년 동안 한국의 연재 호

국제개발협력 선진화 방안 현장중심의 개발협력 방안

동료 검토의 시사점

정책의 문제점과 개선 방향에 관한 의견서 한국의 개발을 위한 정책일관성

는 어떻게 변화했나

년 국제개발협력 소위평가 결과 글로벌

관계부처 합동

덴마크 및 미국에 대한

년 동안 한국의

통합평가 결과보고

선진화 계획

년 국제개발협력 종합시행계획

국제개발협력

호

성명서 국제개발협력기본법 안 의 전면적인 재검토를 요청한다

국제개발협력 실무위원회

전문기관으로의 도약을 위한 로드맵

국제개발협력 선진화 방안 현장중심의 개발협력 방안

최수영

지난

국제개발협력위원회

년 국제개발협력 소위평가 결과 글로벌

원

성명서 통합원조를 위한 국무총리실의 과감한 조치가 필요하다

통합평가 결과보고

선진화 계획

상세 분석

와 한국 개발원조의 부끄러운 현실 연재

성명서 국제개발협력기본법 안 의 전면적인 재검토를 요청한다

국제개발협력 실무위원회

개혁과제

통합 원조시스템으로의 변화 한국 원조시스템의 과거와

질적 변화 연재 호 한국

대

이제는 원조의 질이다 개발공헌지수

성명서 통합원조를 위한 국무총리실의 과감한 조치가 필요하다 국제개발협력위원회

대 국회에서 다루어야 할

호

통합 원조시스템으로의 변화 한국 원조시스템의 과거와

호

보도자료

- 178 -

팀 서울시 마포구 서교동

번지

층