韩国ODA政策研究
摘要
20世纪末，随着前苏联的崩溃和长期支配世界的美国和苏联为中心的冷战时代的结束，世界迎来了和平与合作的新纪元。至此，世界的关注点逐渐从政治及军事安全转向解决社会及经济发展等问题，即人类安全、经济成长、消除贫困及环境保护等领域，这些已成为21世纪人类共同关注的焦点之一，从而追求成长和开发成为最优先考虑解决的课题。
随着国际形势的变化，在消除发展中国家的贫困和谋求经济成长中，来自国际社会努力的必要性进一步得到强化，对发展中国家的经济和社会开发的援助——ODA事业的重要性和认同感也在日益深化。国际社会对发展中国家经济和社会发展的关注程度正在不断加深，为此，发达国家为了适应ODA事业发展变化的需要，已经把ODA事业作为国家开展灵活性外交的重要途径。
对外援助不仅可以起到消除人类贫困、营造和平发展态势的作用，同时也成为从国际社会的角度保护一国国家利益的政策手段。目前，欠发达国家仍然面临饥饿、疾病及政治的不稳定等棘手的问题，同时近年来世界经济的成长一直较为缓慢，但与其相反的是中国和印度的经济却取得较快的发展，其在国际社会的地位正在不断攀升。此外。非洲一些国家的经济也出现了较为明显的好转。在这种国际环境变化中，对外援助已经成为韩国政府提高国际社会地位、深化与欠发达国家间合作关系的重要手段。
世界化进程的加速，使经济成长产生的利益渐渐扩散到低收入的国家，但是进入2000年以后，随着世界化步伐的进一步加快，导致国家间的两极分化加重，经济危机迅速蔓延全世界，世界化的负面作用趋于明显，发展中国家普遍性的经济不景气和贫困化再度抬头，在世界化中发达国家与发展中国家已经通过多种渠道相互依存。今天一个国家或一个地区发生的问题其余波已不受地域的限制，也就是说，一个地区的政治、经济问题已不完全是本地区的事，它同样会给其他国家带来影响。因此，从这一角度看，ODA对贫困国家的支援比任何时候都更具有意义。
但是2008年爆发的金融危机，使世界经济发展陷入前所未有的低潮期，欧洲财政危机使作为主要ODA承担国的欧洲各国的经济停滞不前，特别是发达国家的公共债务问题明显突出，各国为了降低财政赤字，大幅削减了对外援助额度，实行了以本国经济发展优先的政策。
韩国过去曾接受过发达国家的经济援助，从而为经济发展注入了活力。为了回报国际社会，韩国开始通过对外援助等形式支援欠发达国家的经济社会开发事业，经过此间的对外经济开发援助，促使了韩国经济规模的迅速扩大，并于1996年加入了0ECD，在OECD所属的开发援助委员的安排下参与了各类援助项目活动，在OECD下属的25个委员会中韩国唯一没有加入组织是——DAC。
开发合作能促进经济成长、扩大贸易发展。作为OECD的三大政策目标之一的DAC，其职能是与各会员国之间进行政策性对话，协商对发展中国家的开发援助政策及实现相互间的有机配合，引导会员国认真履行各项指标，现在其已成为OECD中的核心委员会。DAC与OECD所属的其它委员会不同，这个委员会是不能随意加入的，韩国加入OECD时，ODA规模仅达1.6亿美元，在GNI的比重中仅占0.03%，处于国际援助较低的水准，所以当时尚不具备加入ODC要求的条件。之后,随着韩国经济实力的增强、承担国际责任及作用的履行及与发展中国家交往的扩大等条件的具备，直到2009年才最终加入ODC。并于2010年正式成为DAC会员国，开始行使自己的权利与义务。在援助政策和执行项目方面进一步发挥了作用。
一般性的DAC规范较国际条约更具有强制性，较宣言式的规范更富有约束性，虽然没有经济性的履行手段保护，但多样化的政策性对话和通过同僚评估，还会使会员遵守各项规定及实现政策调整的要求，也可以说，不必担心没有履行义务的政策性规范，只要通过政策磋商和同僚评估机制就可实现会员国之间遵守规范及完成政策的调整，实现事实上的归属性。
由于加入了DAC，使韩国的对外援助政策迎来了新的转折期，新千年开发援助目标设定以后，韩国在消除国际社会贫困现象中做出了较多的努力，同时韩国为了达到国际社会地位和作用提高后应该承担的责任，正在不断扩大对外援助规模，完善对外援助体系。从中长期看，韩国加入DAC，在国际开发合作与援助规范形成过程中成为主导型的参与者，并提升了韩国参与开发合作相关项目的话语权，较为充分地反映了韩国的立场，在谋求ODA促进体系的先进化方面起到积极的作用。
但是，作为ODA会员国必须遵守其量与质方面的规定要求，履行多样化的政策规范及相关规定，ODA为了促进国际开发合作，采取多样化的政策来促进援助规模的扩大，通过ODA质的改善来提高援助事业的效率化。这种政策性的引导，虽然属于依照OECD协议来规定的没有经济要素的决议，但是按照OECD的惯例，还是具有政治性的、道义性的事实上的约束力。因此，作为ODAH会员国应把这些决议视为具有指向性的政策课题。
韩国于2009年11月成为OECD、DAC的第24个会员国，2010年11月在G20高峰会议上负责主持审议“Seoui Initative”开发议题，这是作为国际经济合作最高级别的G20会议，其中包括发展中国家在内的低收入国家的援助问题也是由韩国来主导审议的。正是因为韩国具有由受援国转为援助国的经历，所以可以从发达国家与发展中国家的两个不同角度考虑问题，进而发挥“折中性”的作用。
从参与会员国的活动开始，韩国向国际社会承诺到2015年为止GNI对比援助规模增为0.25%，按照这一承诺，2010年韩国国际援助额为12亿美元，预计到2015年韩国的ODA规模将达30亿美元左右。随着ODA规模的扩大，韩国将会进一步强化相关预算执行效果的义务，独自完成多样化的援助事业等。随着ODA事业的发展，目前这种分散性的议事决定方式，可能会导致援助事业的重复性问题的发生、降低预算执行的效率等。因此，为了促进对外援助政策的改革和先进化，韩国应该清楚地了解和掌握近期国际合作趋势的变化，特别是成功的处理对内外环境变化带来的影响；进一步加速世界化和开放化进程，并把其作为韩国经济发展的突破口，营造新的成长机会；把与发展中国家的中长期合作为经济发展的基础。从这方面看，应强化对体现泛地球价值的认识，积极开拓发展中国家市场，强化外交安保，提升国家的影响力，等等。
韩国虽然已有20多年的对外援助历史，并积累了一些对外援助方面的经验与阅历，但与发达国家相比仍属于新兴工业化国家，需要改善和发展的地方还是较多。因此，需要进一步检讨现有的相关援助政策，以能更加完善未来的对外援助策略，这也是本人研究此课题的目的。另外，从韩国的收入水平及在国际社会的地位等考虑，今后对外援助规模扩大的潜力还是较大，但过度注重援助规模的扩大，而忽略援助政策改进，还是不能有效改变援助效果低下的状况。另外，如果对援助效果的管理和效果的创造方面存有疑虑，即使援助量有所增加，也不会增强国民对对外援助的认同感。因此，为了保障对外援助的可持续性发展，今后，韩国应对援助政策进行不间断性的诊断及改进。
本论文以ODA相关理论为基础，对ODA进行了较为深入的研究，即国际社会ODA变化的过程、现状及特点、海外援助的主要类型等，在此基础上全面而深入的分析了韩国ODA政策的演变过程及特点、ODA的环境、贸易援助、为消除贫困而开发援助的产业部门、对外援助政策的主要内容、对外开发援助的运行机制、取得的成效、存在的问题及原因、ODA政策的改进方向、未来发展趋势等。其中把韩国对外经济开发援助体系划分为两种形态，即双边开发援助体系及多边开发援助体系，双边援助主要包括有偿援助和无偿援助，多边援助主要是通过各类国际机构来提供援助。
从韩国ODA政策的特点看，韩国是一个由援助接受国转为对外援助实施国的；对外援助规模不断扩大；开发援助对象的选择，主要优先考虑政治外交关系、与韩国的交易比重、对方的资源丰富程度等事项；有偿援助所占的比重较大，比重为38%，而这一比重惟有葡萄牙一国高于韩国。此外，多边ODA预算在不断增加，但在预算管理和效果管理方面存在的问题较多；ODA的运作效果较为低下等。因此，韩国在ODA事业的成果管理和预算安排方面需要进一步加大执行的力度，强化责任感，设立部门间的政策性的协调机构。
韩国ODA政策存在的问题主要体现在，经济援助的比重低于经济规模应该承担的标准；援助财源不足，而且较为单一和分散化；援助政策事前事后管理跟不上；对外援助中的贸易援助地位不突出；无偿援助比重相对较低；对最贫困的发展中国家的援助比重分配不合理等。上述问题存在的主要原因是，援助政策的体系化建设不完善；国家层次的ODA战略考虑还不够全面，综合性的管理体制建设较为欠缺等。
韩国ODA政策改进方向是，制订国家层次的ODA先进化方案，解决好ODA事业的过度分散化，并强化责任感。优先选择比较优位领域进行集中开发援助，构建战略性、先进性和一元化的援助事业促进体系。另外，建立环境和开发合作相结合的统合体系。
今后韩国ODA的发展趋势是，加强ODA事业与民间部门的融合；进一步确保ODA财源的稳定性；强化多边援助与双边援助的相互配合；构建多边合作援助机制和评估体系；营造对外援助的贸易主流化局面；加大对最贫困国援助的力度；把国际援助的宗旨、原则同韩国的特殊立场有机的结合起来。
20th century, ending with the collapse of the former Soviet Union and thelong-term domination of the world as the center of the United States and the SovietUnion Cold War era, the world ushered in a new era of peace and cooperation. So far,the world's focus gradually turned from a political and military security to addresssocial and economic development and other issues, namely, human security, economicgrowth, poverty elimination and environmental protection areas, which have becomethe focus of common concern of humankind in the21st century, thus pursuit ofgrowth and development to become a top priority to resolve the issue.
With the changes in the international situation, the developing countries ineradicating poverty and the pursuit of economic growth, the efforts from theinternational community of the need for further strengthening of economic and socialdevelopment assistance to developing countries-the importance and utility of ODAidentity is also deepening. The degree of concern for the international community'seconomic and social development of developing countries is deepening, for developedcountries to adapt to the changing needs of development ODA, ODA has been thecause of the flexibility of countries as an important way of diplomacy.
Foreign aid can not only play a role in the elimination of human poverty, andcreate a situation of peaceful development, but also become the internationalcommunity from the perspective of protecting the national interests of a country'spolicy instruments. Currently, less developed countries are still faced with intractableproblems of hunger, disease and political instability, while the growth of the worldeconomy in recent years has been relatively slow, but the opposite is the Chinese andIndian economy has achieved rapid development, its position of the internationalcommunity is rising. In addition. Economies of some countries in Africa, there havebeen more obvious improvement. In this changing international environment, foreign aid, the Korean government has become an important means to improve the positionof the international community, to deepen cooperation between the less developedcountries.
Accelerate the process of the world, so that the benefits arising from economicgrowth gradually spread to low-income countries, but after entering in2000, withfurther accelerate the pace of the world, leading to increased polarization betweencountries, the economic crisis spread rapidly around the world, the World of thenegative effects become apparent, developing universal impoverishment of theeconomic downturn and the resurgence in the world of the developed and developingcountries have been through multiple channels of interdependence. Today, theproblem occurs in a country or a region the rest of the wave is not subject togeographical restrictions, say, a political and economic issues in the region is notentirely a thing of the region, it will also affect other countries. Therefore, from thisperspective, ODA support for poor countries are more meaningful than ever.
But the2008outbreak of the financial crisis, the development of the worldeconomy into an unprecedented low tide, the European financial crisis as the country'smain ODA commitments of economic stagnation in Europe, particularly in the publicdebt issue was prominent in developed countries, countries in order to reduce deficit,slashed the amount of foreign aid, the implementation of the policy to the country'seconomic development priorities.
Korea in the past had received economic assistance from developed countries, soas to economic development has injected vitality. In return for the internationalcommunity, South Korea began to support economic and social development projectsin less developed countries in the form of foreign aid, foreign economic anddevelopment aid through here, to promote the rapid expansion of the size of theKorean economy, and in1996joined the0ECD, belongs in the OECD Under theDevelopment Assistance Committee of the arrangements involved in the activities ofvarious types of assistance projects in25OECD committees affiliated organizationsin South Korea is not a member of the only-DAC.
DAC Member States, began to exercise their rights and obligations. In terms ofaid policies and the implementation of projects to further develop the Koreaneconomy in the past had received assistance from developed countries, economicdevelopment, so as to inject vitality. In return for the international community, SouthKorea began to support economic and social development projects in less developedcountries in the form of foreign aid, foreign economic and development aid throughhere, to promote the rapid expansion of the size of the Korean economy, and in1996joined the0ECD, belongs in the OECD Under the Development AssistanceCommittee of the arrangements involved in the activities of various types ofassistance projects in25OECD committees affiliated organizations in South Korea isnot a member of the only-DAC.
Development cooperation can promote economic growth and expand trade. DACOECD as one of the three policy objectives, its functions between the Member Statesand policy dialogue, negotiation of development aid policies on developing countriesand organically with each other, to guide Member States conscientiously fulfill thetargets Now it has become the core of the OECD Committee. OECD DAC withvarious other committees belong, this committee is not at liberty to join, when SouthKorea joined OECD, ODA scale up to only$160million, accounting for only0.03%in the proportion of GNI, in the lower level of international assistance, so when AddODC fashion does not have the required conditions. Later, as South Korea's economicstrength, international responsibility and role to fulfill and expand exchanges withdeveloping countries and other conditions have until2009before eventually joinedODC. And in2010became a role.
DAC norms more general mandatory norms over the declaratory richer than thebinding international treaty, although not fulfill means to protect the economy, but thevariety of policy dialogue and assessment by colleagues, but also the members tocomply with all Provisions and adjustments required to achieve policy, it can be said,do not worry there is no obligation of policy norms, comply with regulations andpolicies as long as the adjustment is completed through policy consultations and colleagues evaluation mechanism can be achieved between Member States, de factoownership sex. aid policies ushered in a new period of transition, the new millenniumdevelopment aid target set in the future, South Korea in the international communityto eliminate poverty has made more efforts in order to achieve the internationalcommunity while South Korea responsibility should be borne by improving the statusand role, is expanding the scale of foreign aid, foreign aid to improve the system.Medium to long term, South Korea joined DAC, become the dominant type ofparticipants in international development cooperation and assistance norm formationprocess, and enhance the right to speak Korean participation in the development ofcooperation related projects, more fully reflects Korea's position in seeking ODApromote advanced technology aspects of the system play an active role.
However, as the ODA Member States must comply with the provisions of itsquantity and quality requirements, perform a variety of policies and regulations andthe relevant regulations, ODA to promote international development cooperation,taking a variety of policies to promote the expansion of the scale of assistance throughODA qualitative improvements to increase the efficiency of aid work. This policyguidance, although there is no economic factors are in accordance with the OECDagreement to the provisions of the resolution, but according to the OECD convention,still has political, moral of the de facto binding. Therefore, as ODAH Member Statesshould put these resolutions as a policy issue has directivity.
South Korea in November2009to become OECD, DAC first24Member States,in November2010at the G20summit chaired considered "Seoui Initative"development agenda, which is known as the highest level of international economiccooperation, the G20meeting, including assistance to developing countries, includinglow-income countries is also from South Korea to lead the deliberations. It is becauseKorea has turned from the aid recipient country's experience, so you can consider theissue from two different angles developed and developing countries, and thus play a"compromise" of the role.
Member States from participating in the event, South Korea promised to the international community to aid comparison of2015GNI scale increased to0.25percent, according to this commitment, in2010the International Aid Korea amountedto$1.2billion, is expected to scale South Korea's ODA in2015will reach about$3billion. With the expansion of the scale of ODA, South Korea will further strengthenthe effectiveness of the implementation of the obligations related to the budget, aidalone to complete a variety of utilities. With the development of the cause of the ODA,the current dispersion of procedure decided manner may result in aid the cause ofrepetitive problems occur, reduce the efficiency of implementation of the budget andso on. Therefore, in order to promote the reform of foreign aid policy and advancedtechnology, South Korea should clearly understand and grasp the trend of recentchanges in international cooperation, in particular the success of treatment on theinternal and external environmental changes brought about; further accelerate theprocess of globalization and openness, and put it as a breakthrough in thedevelopment of the Korean economy, and create new opportunities for growth; thelong-term cooperation with developing countries as a basis for economic development.In this regard, should be strengthened to reflect the value of understanding the EarthPan, actively explore markets in developing countries, to strengthen diplomaticsecurity, enhance the influence of the state, and so on.
Although South Korea has20years of history of foreign aid, and accumulatedsome experience in terms of foreign aid and experience, but compared with developedcountries still belong to the newly industrialized countries, the need to improve anddevelop local or greater. Therefore, the need for further review of the relevant existingaid policies to improve the future can be more foreign aid strategy, which is thesubject of my research for this purpose. In addition, from South Korea, such asincome level and status in the international community to consider the future potentialof foreign aid is still larger scale, but excessive focus on expanding the scale ofassistance, while ignoring aid policy improvements, still can not effectively changethe status of low aid effectiveness. In addition, if the creation of the managementaspects of aid effectiveness and effects of doubts, even if aid has increased, it will not strengthen the national identity of the foreign aid. Therefore, in order to safeguard thesustainable development of foreign aid in the future, Korea aid policy to deal with thediagnosis and uninterrupted improvement.
In this paper, based on the theory related to ODA, ODA conducted on a morein-depth research, that the international community ODA process of change, the statusand characteristics of the main types of overseas aid, on the basis of a comprehensiveand in-depth analysis of the Korean ODA policy the evolution and characteristics,ODA environment, aid for trade, eradication of poverty and development aid sectors,the main content of foreign aid policy, operational mechanism of foreign developmentaid, the results achieved, the problems and the reasons, ODA policy improve thedirection and future development trends. Which the South Korean foreign economicdevelopment aid system is divided into two forms, namely, the development ofbilateral and multilateral development aid system aid system, including bilateral aidand aid paid assistance, multilateral assistance mainly to provide assistance throughvarious international organizations.
From the characteristics of the Korean ODA policy perspective, Korea is acountry to accept the assistance of foreign aid into the country to implement; foreignaid have been expanding; choose development aid target, the main priority to politicaland diplomatic relations, the proportion of trade with South Korea, the otherabundance of resources and other matters; paid a larger proportion of aid, accountingfor38%, and this proportion is higher than only one country, Portugal, Republic ofKorea. In addition, multilateral ODA budget is increasing, but in terms of budgetmanagement and effectiveness of the management problems of many; operation isrelatively low and so the effect of ODA. Therefore, the Korean ODA careerachievements in management and budget execution arrangements need to furtherintensify and strengthen the sense of responsibility, the establishment of acoordinating body for inter-sectoral policies.
Korean ODA policy problems are mainly reflected in the proportion ofsub-standard economic assistance economies of scale should bear; lack of financial resources assistance, and more single and decentralization; aid policy pre-and postpoor management; Trade Aid status of foreign aid not prominent; unpaid proportion ofaid is relatively low; distribution of aid to the poorest developing countries, theproportion of the irrational. The main reason for these problems is that the system isimperfect construction aid policy; national level of ODA strategy is not enough toconsider comprehensive, integrated management system, such as the construction ofmore lacking.
Korean ODA policy direction of improvement, the development of nationaladvanced level of ODA programs to address the cause of the excessivedecentralization of ODA good, and strengthen accountability. Select Priority areas ofrelatively centralized development aid to build strategic, career advancement andpromotion of a unified system of aid. In addition, the establishment of environmentaland development cooperation combines unified system.
The future development trend of Korean ODA is to strengthen the integration ofODA and private sector undertakings; further ensure the stability of the ODA financialresources; strengthening mutual cooperation in multilateral aid and bilateral aid; aid tobuild multilateral cooperation mechanisms and evaluation system; create mainstreamtrade foreign aid of the situation; increase aid to the poorest countries efforts; thepurpose of international aid, South Korea's special position with the principles oforganic combination.
随着国际形势的变化，在消除发展中国家的贫困和谋求经济成长中，来自国际社会努力的必要性进一步得到强化，对发展中国家的经济和社会开发的援助——ODA事业的重要性和认同感也在日益深化。国际社会对发展中国家经济和社会发展的关注程度正在不断加深，为此，发达国家为了适应ODA事业发展变化的需要，已经把ODA事业作为国家开展灵活性外交的重要途径。
对外援助不仅可以起到消除人类贫困、营造和平发展态势的作用，同时也成为从国际社会的角度保护一国国家利益的政策手段。目前，欠发达国家仍然面临饥饿、疾病及政治的不稳定等棘手的问题，同时近年来世界经济的成长一直较为缓慢，但与其相反的是中国和印度的经济却取得较快的发展，其在国际社会的地位正在不断攀升。此外。非洲一些国家的经济也出现了较为明显的好转。在这种国际环境变化中，对外援助已经成为韩国政府提高国际社会地位、深化与欠发达国家间合作关系的重要手段。
世界化进程的加速，使经济成长产生的利益渐渐扩散到低收入的国家，但是进入2000年以后，随着世界化步伐的进一步加快，导致国家间的两极分化加重，经济危机迅速蔓延全世界，世界化的负面作用趋于明显，发展中国家普遍性的经济不景气和贫困化再度抬头，在世界化中发达国家与发展中国家已经通过多种渠道相互依存。今天一个国家或一个地区发生的问题其余波已不受地域的限制，也就是说，一个地区的政治、经济问题已不完全是本地区的事，它同样会给其他国家带来影响。因此，从这一角度看，ODA对贫困国家的支援比任何时候都更具有意义。
但是2008年爆发的金融危机，使世界经济发展陷入前所未有的低潮期，欧洲财政危机使作为主要ODA承担国的欧洲各国的经济停滞不前，特别是发达国家的公共债务问题明显突出，各国为了降低财政赤字，大幅削减了对外援助额度，实行了以本国经济发展优先的政策。
韩国过去曾接受过发达国家的经济援助，从而为经济发展注入了活力。为了回报国际社会，韩国开始通过对外援助等形式支援欠发达国家的经济社会开发事业，经过此间的对外经济开发援助，促使了韩国经济规模的迅速扩大，并于1996年加入了0ECD，在OECD所属的开发援助委员的安排下参与了各类援助项目活动，在OECD下属的25个委员会中韩国唯一没有加入组织是——DAC。
开发合作能促进经济成长、扩大贸易发展。作为OECD的三大政策目标之一的DAC，其职能是与各会员国之间进行政策性对话，协商对发展中国家的开发援助政策及实现相互间的有机配合，引导会员国认真履行各项指标，现在其已成为OECD中的核心委员会。DAC与OECD所属的其它委员会不同，这个委员会是不能随意加入的，韩国加入OECD时，ODA规模仅达1.6亿美元，在GNI的比重中仅占0.03%，处于国际援助较低的水准，所以当时尚不具备加入ODC要求的条件。之后,随着韩国经济实力的增强、承担国际责任及作用的履行及与发展中国家交往的扩大等条件的具备，直到2009年才最终加入ODC。并于2010年正式成为DAC会员国，开始行使自己的权利与义务。在援助政策和执行项目方面进一步发挥了作用。
一般性的DAC规范较国际条约更具有强制性，较宣言式的规范更富有约束性，虽然没有经济性的履行手段保护，但多样化的政策性对话和通过同僚评估，还会使会员遵守各项规定及实现政策调整的要求，也可以说，不必担心没有履行义务的政策性规范，只要通过政策磋商和同僚评估机制就可实现会员国之间遵守规范及完成政策的调整，实现事实上的归属性。
由于加入了DAC，使韩国的对外援助政策迎来了新的转折期，新千年开发援助目标设定以后，韩国在消除国际社会贫困现象中做出了较多的努力，同时韩国为了达到国际社会地位和作用提高后应该承担的责任，正在不断扩大对外援助规模，完善对外援助体系。从中长期看，韩国加入DAC，在国际开发合作与援助规范形成过程中成为主导型的参与者，并提升了韩国参与开发合作相关项目的话语权，较为充分地反映了韩国的立场，在谋求ODA促进体系的先进化方面起到积极的作用。
但是，作为ODA会员国必须遵守其量与质方面的规定要求，履行多样化的政策规范及相关规定，ODA为了促进国际开发合作，采取多样化的政策来促进援助规模的扩大，通过ODA质的改善来提高援助事业的效率化。这种政策性的引导，虽然属于依照OECD协议来规定的没有经济要素的决议，但是按照OECD的惯例，还是具有政治性的、道义性的事实上的约束力。因此，作为ODAH会员国应把这些决议视为具有指向性的政策课题。
韩国于2009年11月成为OECD、DAC的第24个会员国，2010年11月在G20高峰会议上负责主持审议“Seoui Initative”开发议题，这是作为国际经济合作最高级别的G20会议，其中包括发展中国家在内的低收入国家的援助问题也是由韩国来主导审议的。正是因为韩国具有由受援国转为援助国的经历，所以可以从发达国家与发展中国家的两个不同角度考虑问题，进而发挥“折中性”的作用。
从参与会员国的活动开始，韩国向国际社会承诺到2015年为止GNI对比援助规模增为0.25%，按照这一承诺，2010年韩国国际援助额为12亿美元，预计到2015年韩国的ODA规模将达30亿美元左右。随着ODA规模的扩大，韩国将会进一步强化相关预算执行效果的义务，独自完成多样化的援助事业等。随着ODA事业的发展，目前这种分散性的议事决定方式，可能会导致援助事业的重复性问题的发生、降低预算执行的效率等。因此，为了促进对外援助政策的改革和先进化，韩国应该清楚地了解和掌握近期国际合作趋势的变化，特别是成功的处理对内外环境变化带来的影响；进一步加速世界化和开放化进程，并把其作为韩国经济发展的突破口，营造新的成长机会；把与发展中国家的中长期合作为经济发展的基础。从这方面看，应强化对体现泛地球价值的认识，积极开拓发展中国家市场，强化外交安保，提升国家的影响力，等等。
韩国虽然已有20多年的对外援助历史，并积累了一些对外援助方面的经验与阅历，但与发达国家相比仍属于新兴工业化国家，需要改善和发展的地方还是较多。因此，需要进一步检讨现有的相关援助政策，以能更加完善未来的对外援助策略，这也是本人研究此课题的目的。另外，从韩国的收入水平及在国际社会的地位等考虑，今后对外援助规模扩大的潜力还是较大，但过度注重援助规模的扩大，而忽略援助政策改进，还是不能有效改变援助效果低下的状况。另外，如果对援助效果的管理和效果的创造方面存有疑虑，即使援助量有所增加，也不会增强国民对对外援助的认同感。因此，为了保障对外援助的可持续性发展，今后，韩国应对援助政策进行不间断性的诊断及改进。
本论文以ODA相关理论为基础，对ODA进行了较为深入的研究，即国际社会ODA变化的过程、现状及特点、海外援助的主要类型等，在此基础上全面而深入的分析了韩国ODA政策的演变过程及特点、ODA的环境、贸易援助、为消除贫困而开发援助的产业部门、对外援助政策的主要内容、对外开发援助的运行机制、取得的成效、存在的问题及原因、ODA政策的改进方向、未来发展趋势等。其中把韩国对外经济开发援助体系划分为两种形态，即双边开发援助体系及多边开发援助体系，双边援助主要包括有偿援助和无偿援助，多边援助主要是通过各类国际机构来提供援助。
从韩国ODA政策的特点看，韩国是一个由援助接受国转为对外援助实施国的；对外援助规模不断扩大；开发援助对象的选择，主要优先考虑政治外交关系、与韩国的交易比重、对方的资源丰富程度等事项；有偿援助所占的比重较大，比重为38%，而这一比重惟有葡萄牙一国高于韩国。此外，多边ODA预算在不断增加，但在预算管理和效果管理方面存在的问题较多；ODA的运作效果较为低下等。因此，韩国在ODA事业的成果管理和预算安排方面需要进一步加大执行的力度，强化责任感，设立部门间的政策性的协调机构。
韩国ODA政策存在的问题主要体现在，经济援助的比重低于经济规模应该承担的标准；援助财源不足，而且较为单一和分散化；援助政策事前事后管理跟不上；对外援助中的贸易援助地位不突出；无偿援助比重相对较低；对最贫困的发展中国家的援助比重分配不合理等。上述问题存在的主要原因是，援助政策的体系化建设不完善；国家层次的ODA战略考虑还不够全面，综合性的管理体制建设较为欠缺等。
韩国ODA政策改进方向是，制订国家层次的ODA先进化方案，解决好ODA事业的过度分散化，并强化责任感。优先选择比较优位领域进行集中开发援助，构建战略性、先进性和一元化的援助事业促进体系。另外，建立环境和开发合作相结合的统合体系。
今后韩国ODA的发展趋势是，加强ODA事业与民间部门的融合；进一步确保ODA财源的稳定性；强化多边援助与双边援助的相互配合；构建多边合作援助机制和评估体系；营造对外援助的贸易主流化局面；加大对最贫困国援助的力度；把国际援助的宗旨、原则同韩国的特殊立场有机的结合起来。
20th century, ending with the collapse of the former Soviet Union and thelong-term domination of the world as the center of the United States and the SovietUnion Cold War era, the world ushered in a new era of peace and cooperation. So far,the world's focus gradually turned from a political and military security to addresssocial and economic development and other issues, namely, human security, economicgrowth, poverty elimination and environmental protection areas, which have becomethe focus of common concern of humankind in the21st century, thus pursuit ofgrowth and development to become a top priority to resolve the issue.
With the changes in the international situation, the developing countries ineradicating poverty and the pursuit of economic growth, the efforts from theinternational community of the need for further strengthening of economic and socialdevelopment assistance to developing countries-the importance and utility of ODAidentity is also deepening. The degree of concern for the international community'seconomic and social development of developing countries is deepening, for developedcountries to adapt to the changing needs of development ODA, ODA has been thecause of the flexibility of countries as an important way of diplomacy.
Foreign aid can not only play a role in the elimination of human poverty, andcreate a situation of peaceful development, but also become the internationalcommunity from the perspective of protecting the national interests of a country'spolicy instruments. Currently, less developed countries are still faced with intractableproblems of hunger, disease and political instability, while the growth of the worldeconomy in recent years has been relatively slow, but the opposite is the Chinese andIndian economy has achieved rapid development, its position of the internationalcommunity is rising. In addition. Economies of some countries in Africa, there havebeen more obvious improvement. In this changing international environment, foreign aid, the Korean government has become an important means to improve the positionof the international community, to deepen cooperation between the less developedcountries.
Accelerate the process of the world, so that the benefits arising from economicgrowth gradually spread to low-income countries, but after entering in2000, withfurther accelerate the pace of the world, leading to increased polarization betweencountries, the economic crisis spread rapidly around the world, the World of thenegative effects become apparent, developing universal impoverishment of theeconomic downturn and the resurgence in the world of the developed and developingcountries have been through multiple channels of interdependence. Today, theproblem occurs in a country or a region the rest of the wave is not subject togeographical restrictions, say, a political and economic issues in the region is notentirely a thing of the region, it will also affect other countries. Therefore, from thisperspective, ODA support for poor countries are more meaningful than ever.
But the2008outbreak of the financial crisis, the development of the worldeconomy into an unprecedented low tide, the European financial crisis as the country'smain ODA commitments of economic stagnation in Europe, particularly in the publicdebt issue was prominent in developed countries, countries in order to reduce deficit,slashed the amount of foreign aid, the implementation of the policy to the country'seconomic development priorities.
Korea in the past had received economic assistance from developed countries, soas to economic development has injected vitality. In return for the internationalcommunity, South Korea began to support economic and social development projectsin less developed countries in the form of foreign aid, foreign economic anddevelopment aid through here, to promote the rapid expansion of the size of theKorean economy, and in1996joined the0ECD, belongs in the OECD Under theDevelopment Assistance Committee of the arrangements involved in the activities ofvarious types of assistance projects in25OECD committees affiliated organizationsin South Korea is not a member of the only-DAC.
DAC Member States, began to exercise their rights and obligations. In terms ofaid policies and the implementation of projects to further develop the Koreaneconomy in the past had received assistance from developed countries, economicdevelopment, so as to inject vitality. In return for the international community, SouthKorea began to support economic and social development projects in less developedcountries in the form of foreign aid, foreign economic and development aid throughhere, to promote the rapid expansion of the size of the Korean economy, and in1996joined the0ECD, belongs in the OECD Under the Development AssistanceCommittee of the arrangements involved in the activities of various types ofassistance projects in25OECD committees affiliated organizations in South Korea isnot a member of the only-DAC.
Development cooperation can promote economic growth and expand trade. DACOECD as one of the three policy objectives, its functions between the Member Statesand policy dialogue, negotiation of development aid policies on developing countriesand organically with each other, to guide Member States conscientiously fulfill thetargets Now it has become the core of the OECD Committee. OECD DAC withvarious other committees belong, this committee is not at liberty to join, when SouthKorea joined OECD, ODA scale up to only$160million, accounting for only0.03%in the proportion of GNI, in the lower level of international assistance, so when AddODC fashion does not have the required conditions. Later, as South Korea's economicstrength, international responsibility and role to fulfill and expand exchanges withdeveloping countries and other conditions have until2009before eventually joinedODC. And in2010became a role.
DAC norms more general mandatory norms over the declaratory richer than thebinding international treaty, although not fulfill means to protect the economy, but thevariety of policy dialogue and assessment by colleagues, but also the members tocomply with all Provisions and adjustments required to achieve policy, it can be said,do not worry there is no obligation of policy norms, comply with regulations andpolicies as long as the adjustment is completed through policy consultations and colleagues evaluation mechanism can be achieved between Member States, de factoownership sex. aid policies ushered in a new period of transition, the new millenniumdevelopment aid target set in the future, South Korea in the international communityto eliminate poverty has made more efforts in order to achieve the internationalcommunity while South Korea responsibility should be borne by improving the statusand role, is expanding the scale of foreign aid, foreign aid to improve the system.Medium to long term, South Korea joined DAC, become the dominant type ofparticipants in international development cooperation and assistance norm formationprocess, and enhance the right to speak Korean participation in the development ofcooperation related projects, more fully reflects Korea's position in seeking ODApromote advanced technology aspects of the system play an active role.
However, as the ODA Member States must comply with the provisions of itsquantity and quality requirements, perform a variety of policies and regulations andthe relevant regulations, ODA to promote international development cooperation,taking a variety of policies to promote the expansion of the scale of assistance throughODA qualitative improvements to increase the efficiency of aid work. This policyguidance, although there is no economic factors are in accordance with the OECDagreement to the provisions of the resolution, but according to the OECD convention,still has political, moral of the de facto binding. Therefore, as ODAH Member Statesshould put these resolutions as a policy issue has directivity.
South Korea in November2009to become OECD, DAC first24Member States,in November2010at the G20summit chaired considered "Seoui Initative"development agenda, which is known as the highest level of international economiccooperation, the G20meeting, including assistance to developing countries, includinglow-income countries is also from South Korea to lead the deliberations. It is becauseKorea has turned from the aid recipient country's experience, so you can consider theissue from two different angles developed and developing countries, and thus play a"compromise" of the role.
Member States from participating in the event, South Korea promised to the international community to aid comparison of2015GNI scale increased to0.25percent, according to this commitment, in2010the International Aid Korea amountedto$1.2billion, is expected to scale South Korea's ODA in2015will reach about$3billion. With the expansion of the scale of ODA, South Korea will further strengthenthe effectiveness of the implementation of the obligations related to the budget, aidalone to complete a variety of utilities. With the development of the cause of the ODA,the current dispersion of procedure decided manner may result in aid the cause ofrepetitive problems occur, reduce the efficiency of implementation of the budget andso on. Therefore, in order to promote the reform of foreign aid policy and advancedtechnology, South Korea should clearly understand and grasp the trend of recentchanges in international cooperation, in particular the success of treatment on theinternal and external environmental changes brought about; further accelerate theprocess of globalization and openness, and put it as a breakthrough in thedevelopment of the Korean economy, and create new opportunities for growth; thelong-term cooperation with developing countries as a basis for economic development.In this regard, should be strengthened to reflect the value of understanding the EarthPan, actively explore markets in developing countries, to strengthen diplomaticsecurity, enhance the influence of the state, and so on.
Although South Korea has20years of history of foreign aid, and accumulatedsome experience in terms of foreign aid and experience, but compared with developedcountries still belong to the newly industrialized countries, the need to improve anddevelop local or greater. Therefore, the need for further review of the relevant existingaid policies to improve the future can be more foreign aid strategy, which is thesubject of my research for this purpose. In addition, from South Korea, such asincome level and status in the international community to consider the future potentialof foreign aid is still larger scale, but excessive focus on expanding the scale ofassistance, while ignoring aid policy improvements, still can not effectively changethe status of low aid effectiveness. In addition, if the creation of the managementaspects of aid effectiveness and effects of doubts, even if aid has increased, it will not strengthen the national identity of the foreign aid. Therefore, in order to safeguard thesustainable development of foreign aid in the future, Korea aid policy to deal with thediagnosis and uninterrupted improvement.
In this paper, based on the theory related to ODA, ODA conducted on a morein-depth research, that the international community ODA process of change, the statusand characteristics of the main types of overseas aid, on the basis of a comprehensiveand in-depth analysis of the Korean ODA policy the evolution and characteristics,ODA environment, aid for trade, eradication of poverty and development aid sectors,the main content of foreign aid policy, operational mechanism of foreign developmentaid, the results achieved, the problems and the reasons, ODA policy improve thedirection and future development trends. Which the South Korean foreign economicdevelopment aid system is divided into two forms, namely, the development ofbilateral and multilateral development aid system aid system, including bilateral aidand aid paid assistance, multilateral assistance mainly to provide assistance throughvarious international organizations.
From the characteristics of the Korean ODA policy perspective, Korea is acountry to accept the assistance of foreign aid into the country to implement; foreignaid have been expanding; choose development aid target, the main priority to politicaland diplomatic relations, the proportion of trade with South Korea, the otherabundance of resources and other matters; paid a larger proportion of aid, accountingfor38%, and this proportion is higher than only one country, Portugal, Republic ofKorea. In addition, multilateral ODA budget is increasing, but in terms of budgetmanagement and effectiveness of the management problems of many; operation isrelatively low and so the effect of ODA. Therefore, the Korean ODA careerachievements in management and budget execution arrangements need to furtherintensify and strengthen the sense of responsibility, the establishment of acoordinating body for inter-sectoral policies.
Korean ODA policy problems are mainly reflected in the proportion ofsub-standard economic assistance economies of scale should bear; lack of financial resources assistance, and more single and decentralization; aid policy pre-and postpoor management; Trade Aid status of foreign aid not prominent; unpaid proportion ofaid is relatively low; distribution of aid to the poorest developing countries, theproportion of the irrational. The main reason for these problems is that the system isimperfect construction aid policy; national level of ODA strategy is not enough toconsider comprehensive, integrated management system, such as the construction ofmore lacking.
Korean ODA policy direction of improvement, the development of nationaladvanced level of ODA programs to address the cause of the excessivedecentralization of ODA good, and strengthen accountability. Select Priority areas ofrelatively centralized development aid to build strategic, career advancement andpromotion of a unified system of aid. In addition, the establishment of environmentaland development cooperation combines unified system.
The future development trend of Korean ODA is to strengthen the integration ofODA and private sector undertakings; further ensure the stability of the ODA financialresources; strengthening mutual cooperation in multilateral aid and bilateral aid; aid tobuild multilateral cooperation mechanisms and evaluation system; create mainstreamtrade foreign aid of the situation; increase aid to the poorest countries efforts; thepurpose of international aid, South Korea's special position with the principles oforganic combination.
引文
[49]唐家璇:中国外交辞典,世界知识出版社,2000年。
[50]周弘主：对外援助与国际关系，中国社会科学出版社，2002年。
[51]陈彦霖，钟心岑：基于货币国际化战略视角的ODA效用分析，中南林业科技大学学报，2013年6月。
[52]屈彩云：宏观与微观视角下的日本环境ODA研究及对中国的启示，东北亚论坛，2013年5月。
[53]日本外务省：政府开发援助（ODA）白皮书，东京，国立印刷局，2007年。
[54]日外务省：政府开发援助（ODA）白皮书，东京，国际协力推进协会，2012年。
[55]中国对外援助白皮书，中华人民共和国中央人民政府网，http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2011-04/21/content_1849712.htm,2013-02-28.
[56]金熙德:日本政府开发援助,北京：社会科学文献出版社，2000年.
[57]日本国驻华大使馆:日本政府开发与援助大纲,2003年10月.
[58]日本国驻华大使馆网站:http://www.cn.emb-japan.go.jp/cul_edu/kouza050803.htm.
[59]冯剑:国际比较框架中的日本ODA全球战略分析，世界经济与政治，2008年第六期。
[60]刘苗苗:日本ODA的发展与动机研究,北方经贸，2007年第7期。
[61]刘国化，李阵:战后日本经济外交及其新动向，东北大学学报(社会科学版),2007第5期。张曦:日本对中国的政府开发援助，世界经济，2004年第2期。
[62]雷慧英，卓凌：日本对华援助(ODA)政策调整的原因分析，东北亚论坛，2006年11月。
[63]李晓：当前日本经济形势及中日经济关系的新变化，东北亚论坛，2003年第三期。
[64]金熙德：日本财务省探讨对华ODA新思路，中国社会科学院院报，2004年第三期。
[65]冯昭奎：日本：战略的贫困，北京，中国城市出版社，2002年。
[66]日本外务省经济合作局；我国的官方发展援助(ODA)白皮书(上卷)，国际合作促进会1995年。
[67]金熙德：中日关系－复交30周年的思考，北京，世界知识出版社，2002年。
[68]朱凤岚，日本对华官方发展援助的定位与评价，当代亚太，2004年。
[69] Alesina, A. and D. Dollar.2000.“Who gives foreign aid to whom and why?” Journal ofEconomic Growth,5. pp.33-63.
[70] Amsden A.1989. Asia's Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization, OxfordUniversity Press.
[71] Andrews, Nathan.2009.“Foreign aid and development in Africa: What the literature saysand what the reality is.” Journal of African Studies and Development.
[72] Asante, S. K. B.1985.“International Assistance and International Capitalism: Supportive orCounterproductive?,” In Gwendolyn Carter and Patrick O'Meara eds. AfricanIndependence: The First Twenty-Five Years. Bloomington, Indiana, USA: Indiana UniversityPress.
[73] Ashoff, D.2005. Enhancing Policy Coherence for Development: Justification, Recognitionand Approaches to Achievement. German Development Institute (DIE) Studies. Atingi-Ego,Michael.2005.“Budget support, Aid Dependency, and Dutch Disease: Case of Uganda.”World Bank.
[74] Bauer, Peter Thomas.1972. Dissent on Development. Harvard University Press. BenerjeeA.2008.“Big Answers for Big Questions: The Presumption of Macroeconomics.” BrookingsGlobal Economy and Development Conference: What Works in Development? Thinking Bigand Thinking Small.
[75] Berg A., C. Papageorgiou, C. Pattillo, M. Schindler, N. Spatafora, and H. Weisfeld.2011.“Global Shocks and their Impact on Low-Income Countries: Lessons from the GlobalFinancial Crisis.” IMF Working Paper.
[76] Berthelemy J.-C. and A. Trichit.2004.“Bilateral doners' aid allocation decisions-athree-dimensional panel analysis.” International Review of Economics and Finance,13, pp.253-274.
[77] Bond.2010. Seoul G20Summit: UK NGDO Briefing Paper. Boone, P.1996.“Politics andthe Effectiveness of Foreign Aid.” European Economic Review,40, pp.289-329.
[78] Bretherton, C. and J. Vogler2008.“The European Union as a Sustainable DevelopmentActor: the Case of External Fisheries Policy.” Journal of European Integration,30(3), pp.401-417.
[79] World Bank.2001. Making Sustainable Commitments: An Environment Strategy for theWorld Bank.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[80] World Bank.2008a. Country Environmental Analysis (CEA): Concept Note.
[81] World Bank.2010. Lessons from Environmental Mainstreaming: Towards EnvironmentalSustainability.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[82] World Bank.2011. The Changing Wealth of Nations: Measuring Sustainable Development inthe New Millennium. World Bank: Washington D.C.
[83] World Bank.2012. Toward a Green, Clean, and Resilient World for All: A World Bank GroupEnvironment Strategy2012-2022.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[84] World Bank IEG.2008. Environmental Sustainability: An Evaluation of World
[85] Bank Group Support.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[86] Knowledge Sharing Program(KSP) http://www.ksp.go.kr
[50]周弘主：对外援助与国际关系，中国社会科学出版社，2002年。
[51]陈彦霖，钟心岑：基于货币国际化战略视角的ODA效用分析，中南林业科技大学学报，2013年6月。
[52]屈彩云：宏观与微观视角下的日本环境ODA研究及对中国的启示，东北亚论坛，2013年5月。
[53]日本外务省：政府开发援助（ODA）白皮书，东京，国立印刷局，2007年。
[54]日外务省：政府开发援助（ODA）白皮书，东京，国际协力推进协会，2012年。
[55]中国对外援助白皮书，中华人民共和国中央人民政府网，http://www.gov.cn/gzdt/2011-04/21/content_1849712.htm,2013-02-28.
[56]金熙德:日本政府开发援助,北京：社会科学文献出版社，2000年.
[57]日本国驻华大使馆:日本政府开发与援助大纲,2003年10月.
[58]日本国驻华大使馆网站:http://www.cn.emb-japan.go.jp/cul_edu/kouza050803.htm.
[59]冯剑:国际比较框架中的日本ODA全球战略分析，世界经济与政治，2008年第六期。
[60]刘苗苗:日本ODA的发展与动机研究,北方经贸，2007年第7期。
[61]刘国化，李阵:战后日本经济外交及其新动向，东北大学学报(社会科学版),2007第5期。张曦:日本对中国的政府开发援助，世界经济，2004年第2期。
[62]雷慧英，卓凌：日本对华援助(ODA)政策调整的原因分析，东北亚论坛，2006年11月。
[63]李晓：当前日本经济形势及中日经济关系的新变化，东北亚论坛，2003年第三期。
[64]金熙德：日本财务省探讨对华ODA新思路，中国社会科学院院报，2004年第三期。
[65]冯昭奎：日本：战略的贫困，北京，中国城市出版社，2002年。
[66]日本外务省经济合作局；我国的官方发展援助(ODA)白皮书(上卷)，国际合作促进会1995年。
[67]金熙德：中日关系－复交30周年的思考，北京，世界知识出版社，2002年。
[68]朱凤岚，日本对华官方发展援助的定位与评价，当代亚太，2004年。
[69] Alesina, A. and D. Dollar.2000.“Who gives foreign aid to whom and why?” Journal ofEconomic Growth,5. pp.33-63.
[70] Amsden A.1989. Asia's Next Giant: South Korea and Late Industrialization, OxfordUniversity Press.
[71] Andrews, Nathan.2009.“Foreign aid and development in Africa: What the literature saysand what the reality is.” Journal of African Studies and Development.
[72] Asante, S. K. B.1985.“International Assistance and International Capitalism: Supportive orCounterproductive?,” In Gwendolyn Carter and Patrick O'Meara eds. AfricanIndependence: The First Twenty-Five Years. Bloomington, Indiana, USA: Indiana UniversityPress.
[73] Ashoff, D.2005. Enhancing Policy Coherence for Development: Justification, Recognitionand Approaches to Achievement. German Development Institute (DIE) Studies. Atingi-Ego,Michael.2005.“Budget support, Aid Dependency, and Dutch Disease: Case of Uganda.”World Bank.
[74] Bauer, Peter Thomas.1972. Dissent on Development. Harvard University Press. BenerjeeA.2008.“Big Answers for Big Questions: The Presumption of Macroeconomics.” BrookingsGlobal Economy and Development Conference: What Works in Development? Thinking Bigand Thinking Small.
[75] Berg A., C. Papageorgiou, C. Pattillo, M. Schindler, N. Spatafora, and H. Weisfeld.2011.“Global Shocks and their Impact on Low-Income Countries: Lessons from the GlobalFinancial Crisis.” IMF Working Paper.
[76] Berthelemy J.-C. and A. Trichit.2004.“Bilateral doners' aid allocation decisions-athree-dimensional panel analysis.” International Review of Economics and Finance,13, pp.253-274.
[77] Bond.2010. Seoul G20Summit: UK NGDO Briefing Paper. Boone, P.1996.“Politics andthe Effectiveness of Foreign Aid.” European Economic Review,40, pp.289-329.
[78] Bretherton, C. and J. Vogler2008.“The European Union as a Sustainable DevelopmentActor: the Case of External Fisheries Policy.” Journal of European Integration,30(3), pp.401-417.
[79] World Bank.2001. Making Sustainable Commitments: An Environment Strategy for theWorld Bank.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[80] World Bank.2008a. Country Environmental Analysis (CEA): Concept Note.
[81] World Bank.2010. Lessons from Environmental Mainstreaming: Towards EnvironmentalSustainability.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[82] World Bank.2011. The Changing Wealth of Nations: Measuring Sustainable Development inthe New Millennium. World Bank: Washington D.C.
[83] World Bank.2012. Toward a Green, Clean, and Resilient World for All: A World Bank GroupEnvironment Strategy2012-2022.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[84] World Bank IEG.2008. Environmental Sustainability: An Evaluation of World
[85] Bank Group Support.The World Bank: Washington, DC.
[86] Knowledge Sharing Program(KSP) http://www.ksp.go.kr