Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SDGs & Korea’s Development Experiences
Prof. Hyun-Sik Chang
(Former Vice President of KOICA)
Korea from the recipient to the donor
Korea’s SDGs Strategy & Development Experiences
I
II
Contents
2
I. Korea from recipient to donor
3
4
1. Switch from Recipient to Donor
• Short-run
relief
• Grant(100%),
Relief goods
• USA
• Defense,
stability,
Rehabilitation
• Grant(98.5%),
goods, TA
• USA, UN
• Heavy industry
growth
• Concessional
loan (70%)
• USA, Japan
• Non-concessional
financing
• Bailout rom IMF
• Phase out aid
receipt
1945-1952 1953-1962 1963-1979 1980~
• Started assistance
with equipment
supply (1963)
1970s
• UNDP declared Korea’s transition
from recipient to donor (1991)
• Foundation of KOICA (1995)
• Joined OECD (1996)
1990s
• Established the CIDC (2006)
• Enacted Act on IDC (2010)
• Joined OECD/DAC (2010)
• Launched the G20 leader summit (2010)
• Hosted High Level Forum(HLF-4) in Busan (2011)
• Construction training
program (1983)
• Foundation of EDCF (1987)
• Dispatched Korean
volunteers(UNESCO) (1989)
1980s 2000s
Philosophy of Korea’s ODA
• Make use of Korean development experience & Know-how
• Systematic link Between Bilateral & M
• Respect Local Ownership, Tradition, Culture
Principles of Korea’s ODA
KOICA Act, EDCF Act
Enforcement of Korea’s ODA Law (2010.7.)
Composition of Committee for International Development Cooperation, Evaluation Committee
Principles of selecting priority partner countries
Responsible agency for ODA statistics
Enactment of Korea’s ODA Law(2009.12)
Basic Philosophy and Objectives of Korean ODA Basic concept of grants, concessional loans Responsible agencies for loan and grants
Legal Basis of Korea’s ODA
8
Korea’s ODA Architecture
ODA
Bilateral
Multilateral
GRANT AID (& Tech. Co.)
LOANS (EDCF)
KOICA
EXIM Bank
MOFA
MOSF
International Organizations
International Financial
Institutions
Types of cooperation
Implementingorganization
Authorities concerned
MOFA
MOSF
9
Korea’s ODA Contribution
• Net ODA quadrupled the last decade ($0.5 bn. to $2.0 bn. in 2015)
• After DAC membership, Korea increased by 50%, whereas the world total by 9%
• The second largest increase among DAC members after Sweden
• Still, 0.14% of ODA/GNI below the DAC average
• Despite rapid size-up, ODA ratio does not reach the national target (0.2% of GNI)
1. Rapid expansion in size, yet below global average
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Net-ODA from Korea
Million US$ % of GNI
Source: OECD stat.
10
Korea’s ODA Contribution: Efforts to meet the
International Standard
2. DAC Peer Reviews
• First assessment in accordance with international standard since joining OECD DAC
• Prepare counterplans to accommodate the recommendations
3. More Multilateral aid
• Increased ‘multilateral’ ratio
• ‘Multilateral’ ratio of 25% (net-disbursement) got close to the DAC average of 30%
4. Untying Aid
• Target: 75% of ‘bilateral’ (grant 100%, loan 50%) untied by 2020
• Steadily increased untied aid ratio
259
884
142
593
0
200
400
600
800
1000
2006 2014
Bilateral by type (million US $)
Grant LoanSource: OECD stat.
79
461 376
1396
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2006 2014
Multilateral and Bilateral (million US $)
Multilateral BilateralSource: KEXIM
11
Korea’s ODA Contribution: Effort to Meet the International
Standard
5. Host the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4)
• Leading dialogue on development agenda
• Formation of partnership for effective development cooperation
• Representative of global partnership executive committee
Shared principles to achieve common goals
Ownership by partner counties Countries should define the development model that they want to
implement
Focus on results Having a sustainable impact should be the driving force behind
investments and efforts in development policy making
Partnerships for development Development depends on the participation of all actors, and
recognizes the diversity and complementarity of their functions
Transparency and shared
responsibility
Development co-operation must be transparent and accountable to
all citizens
Source: OECD DAC
II. Korea’s SDGs Strategy & Its Contribution
12
13
1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
GSP Graduate School of Pan-Pacific International Studies
The 2nd International Development Cooperation Plan (2016-2020) stipulates to achieve SDGs (Jan)
Government’s Strategy Framework for SDGs(March)
1. Better Life for Girls
2. Safe Life for All
3. STI for Better Life
*Better Education for Africa Rise
- Better Education for girls - Better Health for girls
- Better capacity building for girls
- Immunization under the prevention -Capacity Building of National Laboratory
-Capacity Building for workforce
-Better Education of Science & Technology -Capacity Building for S&T
-More Investment in infrastructure
-Better Education tailored to African countries -Better educational environment using ICT
4. Sustainable Rural Dev.
- Productivity & Income increase - Improvement of living environment
Select & Focus
Domestic
/global Partnership
Pilot&
Dissemination
KOICA’s Strategic Framework
Strategy to mainstream SDGs
in KOICA
Mid-term strategy by
Sectors (2016-2020)
KOICA Mid-term Strategy
integrated
KOICA will contribute to achieve SDGs ;
WHERE Country Region
-Government’s CPS, KOICA CPS -Regional Financial Allocation Plan
-Strategy for Fragile states
WHAT Sector -Mid-term sectoral strategies of priority
sector/cross-cutting issues * for SDGs Brand Program
HOW Resource Modality
-Improvement of implementation - Diversification of Development
Financing & Aid Modality
WITH WHOM
Partner -Streamline of effective partnership * Guideline for outreach and result
oriented partnership
Institutional improvement works to
do
-Human resource development -Result based M&E enhancement in line
with SDGs
Mid-term Strategies by sectors
Cross-cutting
Education Health Agri. & Fisheries
Tech. Environment,
Energy
Public Admin.
Mid-term Strategy by Sector 2016-2020
Each Strategy designs SDGs Brand Programs
(~2016.6)
Inclusive and Sustainable
Rural Development (based on) Saemaul Undong
Better Life for
Girls
Safe Life for All
From infectious diseases
STI for Better Life
Safe Water & Clean
Energy in Climate Change
Response
Reflects Government Dev. Cooperation Initiatives
Strategy to mainstream SDGs
in KOICA
Mid-term strategy by
Sectors (2016-2020)
KOICA Mid-term Strategy
integrated
17
Korea’s Comparative Advantages for Development
1. Recent Experiences of Industrialization
• Industrialized under different environments from traditional western donors
• Easier for current developing countries to benchmark
• Keep sharing development experiences with partners for over 40 years
- Technical cooperation since 1977
- Knowledge Sharing Program [KSP]
- Development Experience Exchange Partnership [DEEP]
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
19
60
19
63
19
66
19
69
19
72
19
75
19
78
19
81
19
84
19
87
19
90
19
93
19
96
19
99
20
02
20
05
20
08
20
11
20
14
Rise of Korean Economy (GDP, billion USD)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
1945-1960 1961-1975 1976-1990 1991-1999
Loans
Grants
Aid granted to Korea (million USD)
18
Korea’s Comparative Advantages for Development
2. Self-reliant development, not aid-dependent
• Established institutional capacity to manage sustained growth
• Ownership-based utilization of foreign aid
3. Produced competent human resources
• Human capital compensated for the lack of natural and financial capital
• Sequential educational upgrading in accordance with the industrial demand
4. Built Institutional Capacity for Resilience
• Competent government to allow state-led industrialization
• Institutional potential to overcome repeated challenges and crises
• Civil capacity to transform authoritarian politics into democratic
• Continuous efforts for anti-corruption and transparency The Unfair Solicitation Prevention Act of 2016
19
Priority SDGs (1): Inclusive and Quality Education
Why Korea is competitive?
• Education was critical input for growth.
• Stepwise expansion in accordance with
financial conditions and industrial needs
• Educational reform experiences to share
• Diversified industrial structure and TVET
Why it matters?
• Education as catalyst for development
• Increased opportunities and wages
1 year more schooling to bring 10% higher wage (UNESCO)
before
1967
Labor intensive
industry
• Technical high school
• Evening vocational courses
1967-
1970s
Light and heavy
industry
• In-plant training system
• Subsidies and training levy
1980s Capital intensive
industry
• Public training system
• Korea Vocational Training
Management Agency
• Technical education colleges
Korea’s Industrialization and TVET
20
Social 11.3% of the social infra service sector in 2015
• Technical support for vocational training
Strengthen teachers’ competencies and field
centered training
• Quality education for primary and secondary
Foster teachers, develop curriculums, and
expand educational finance
49%
33%
5%
13%
Korea's ODA Social Infraand Service
EconomicInfra andService
IndustrialSector
Education
11.3%
Health
11.8% Population
Water and
Sanitation 10.9%
Governance
5.4%
Etc.
1.2% Etc.
Korea’s expectable contributions
Strategic
objectives
High quality
primary education
Foster
technical personnel
Foster
highly talented personnel
Key program
• More primary
education • More vocational training • More higher education
• Better primary
education
• Better vocational
training • Better higher education
• Better primary
education systems
• Better vocational
training systems
• Better higher education
policies
KOICA’s Key Education Programs
Priority SDGs (1): Inclusive and Quality Education
Why Korea is competitive?
• Systematic water resources management through long-term plans since 1960s
• 41 aid projects were successfully completed in 20 countries since 1994
Why it matters?
• 1.8 billion people use a contaminated source of drinking water.
• 2.4 billion people lack access to basic sanitation services
• Water scarcity affects more than 40% of the global population
‘65 (1st) Water Resources Development
and Management
Dam Development and
Flood Control Project
Key issue:
Multipurpose Dam
Development
‘80 (2nd) ‘90 (3rd) ‘96 (3-1th) ‘01 (4th) ‘06 (4-1th)
Eco-friendly Water
Resources Development
and Management
Sound Waster Use, Creation of Safe
and Friendly Water Environment
Sustainable Water Management
that Human and Nature Desire
‘11 (4-2th) Waster vision 2020
Realization of Water
Power for Green National
Land
Source: K-Water, 2015
Water Management Paradigm in Korea
Priority SDGs (2): Access to Safe Water and Sanitation
Education and training in water supply and…
Basic sanitation
Water supply - large systems
Basic drinking water supply
Water resources protection
Sanitation - large systems
Water resources policy/administrative management
River basins development
Waste management/disposal
Basic drinking water supply and basic sanitation
Water supply and sanitation - large systems
Water and Sanitation Aid from Korea (2005-2014)
• Increased water and sanitation–related aid since 2006
• Focusing on priority partners and subsectors
Top five countries: Sri-Lanka, Cambodia, Nepal, Laos, and Vietnam
Priority subsectors: ‘Large water supply and sanitation system’, ‘Basic drinking water supply’
• Technical assistance
Propriety investigation, Design, Technical support
Construction management, Facility operation & management
Korea’s expectable contributions
Priority SDGs (2): Access to Safe Water and Sanitation
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2006-2008 2009-2011 2012-2014
Korea’s Water and Sanitation Aid (3 -year average) mil. USD
Why it matters?
• Poverty eradication is possible through stable and well-paid jobs
• Globally 470 million jobs are needed for new entrants to the labor
market between 2016 and 2030
Why Korea is competitive?
• High employment rate during economic
boom, especially in exporting sector
• Successful industrial transformation
creating jobs in new industries
23
Growth rate in Employment
Source: KOSTAT
Priority SDGs (3): Decent Work and Economic Growth
24
Korea’s expectable contributions
Structural creation
56%
Structural destruction
24%
Economy adaptiveness
10%
Economy retrogressive
10%
Mid-1990's
Source: Park and Jang (2006)
Employment Dynamics in Korea
Structural creation
23%
Structural destruction
26%
Economy adaptiveness
43%
Economy retrogressive
8%
2001-2003
• Stimulate manufacturing industry through export promotion
• Help select and concentrate on strategic industries
• Policy consulting for industrial transformation
• Guide compatible progress between education and industry
Priority sector Partners
Vocational Training Nepal, Vietnam, Ghana, Ethiopia
(4 out of 26)
Human Resource
development
Laos, Sri Lanka, Cambodia,
Uzbekistan, Nigeria, Rwanda,
Mozambique, Cameroon
(8 out of 26)
Source: KOICA
Partners in need of Training and HR development
Priority SDGs (3): Decent Work and Economic Growth
25
Why it matters?
• Infrastructure is the primary condition for industrialization.
• Industrialization allows sustained increase in income and living
standards.
• 1 to 1.15 billion have no access to reliable phone services.
Why Korea is competitive?
• Accumulated technology and experiences in the
construction and maintenance of infrastructure
• Soundly financed infrastructure, not causing large
budget deficits
• Utilized Public Private Partnership(PPP) tool for
infrastructure investment
• Loan-type aid to support infrastructure investment 1963 1975
Paved road and expressway
2011
Priority SDGs (4): Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
26
• Reduce financing cost by providing concessional loan with MDBs to infrastructure sectors
• Share the knowledge and experiences on operation/ and maintenance of SOC
• Combined support for hard construction and soft ICT system
e-learning system with training centers
Korea’s expectable contributions
Social Infrastructure &
Services 45% Economic
Infrastructure & Services
29%
Production Sector 8%
Korea’s aid by sector
Source: KOICA
Economic Infrastructure
& Services 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Transport & Storage 47% 73% 67% 62% 61%
Communications 25% 14% 16% 11% 12%
Energy 26% 12% 16% 26% 26%
Banking & Financing Services 1% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Business & Other Services 1% 1% 0% 1% 1%
Source: KOICA
Priority SDGs (4): Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
Why Korea is competitive?
• Established institutions in line with national development stage.
• Dual achievement of growth and democracy in a short period.
• Government particularly strong at implementation and
monitoring.
• Rich knowledge on institution design accumulated at national
policy research institutes.
Year Percentile Rank
(0 to 100)
1996 73.17
2000 76.10
2004 80.00
2008 81.55
2012 84.36
2015 80.45
Korea’s Government Competitiveness
Source: WGI
Why it matters?
• Quality institutions are the most reliable foundation for
development.
• The rule of law and development are mutually reinforcing.
• Corruption, bribery, theft and tax evasion cost some US $1.26
trillion for developing countries per year.
27
Priority SDGs (5): Effective, Accountable and Inclusive
Institutions
28
• Institutionalize anti-corruption and transparency
• Strengthen competences of public officers and relevant training system
• Help consensus building and conflict management
• Governance sector is one of Kore’s core aid themes
28
KOICA’s Key Public Administration Sector Programs
Strategic
objectives
Capacity building on
National Development
Initiatives
Effective and efficient
E-Government
Efficient and transparent
administrative
competency
Legal system and public
security modification
Key
Programs
• Support of national
economic plan
• Consultation on transition
to market economy
• Legal consulting on
industrial policies
• Preparation on e-
government institution
• E-government
infrastructure building
• E-government upgrade
• Capacity development
of civil servants
• Anti-corruption and
transparency
• Quality improvement of
public services
• Capacity building of
judicial officers
• Introducing fair and
just legal system
• Crime prevention and
public security
Korea’s expectable contributions
Priority SDGs (5): Effective, Accountable and Inclusive
Institutions
Thank you
29
