OECD 개발원조위원회 가입과 정책과제

• 영문명: Korea s Policy to Join the DAC: Challenges and Prospects
• 발행기관: 국제개발협력학회
• 저자명: 권율(Kwon, Yul)
• 간행물 정보: 『국제개발협력연구』제1권 제1호, 109~141쪽, 전체 33쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 정책학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2009.08.30

영문 초록

Korea’s aid operation lags far behind those of other DAC member countries with little domestic support from the public. Under these circumstances, Korea faces a formidable task to meet the high standards set by other major donor countries in terms of both quantity and quality. Since Korea’s entry into the OECD in 1996, the DAC still remains the only Committee that Korea has not joined among the 25 Committees with in the OECD. Accession to the DAC has been discussed with in the Korean government since 2004, and the ‘Comprehensive ODA Improvement Plan’ adopted at the Cabinet Council Meeting in 2005 stated that the government will examine its accession to the DAC. In addition, the second and fourth meeting of the CIDC reiterated the resolution that the government will work to achieve accession in 2010. With the world’s 13th largest economy, Korea is already a larger net donor than five DAC members in 2008, ranked the 19th largest donor among countries provided the preliminary data to OECD. According to the DAC, Korea would become the world’s 14th largest donor if the Korean government reaches the target of 0.25% by 2015. This will imply an estimated program of around US$ 3 billions. If the DAC members meet their commitments to 0.7% of GNI by 2015, however, Korea’s ODA/GNI will be still far behind. In order to be comparable to DAC members, Korea’s ODA budget needs a dramatic increase. The Korean government has been taking steps to join the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) by 2010 in order to improve its capacity for ODA management and to promote greater harmonization of aid policies with other advanced countries.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말

Ⅱ. DAC 가입기준과 국제규범

Ⅲ. ODA 정책과제 및 개선방안

Ⅳ. 맺음말

키워드

언타이드 원조 원조 효과성 원조조화 결과중심의 관리 파리선언 ODA untied aid aid effectiveness harmonization managing forresults evaluation system accountability