Policy Analyses
PUBLISH
Policy Analyses
-
Effects and Implications of China’s Carbon Pricing Policy on Changes in Korea-China Economic Relations
China’s “carbon neutral clock” has been speeding up since pivoting from its original skepticism regarding developing countries’ obligations to reduce emissions, internationally declaring in 2020 its vision of bringing carbon e..
Jihyun Jung et al. Date 2022.12.30
Economic relations, Environmental policy ChinaDownloadContent
SummaryChina’s “carbon neutral clock” has been speeding up since pivoting from its original skepticism regarding developing countries’ obligations to reduce emissions, internationally declaring in 2020 its vision of bringing carbon emissions to a peak in 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060. As a developing economy that emits the largest amount of carbon in the world, China’s declaration of carbon neutrality ahead of Korea, the United States, and Japan was praised as a “historic event” adding momentum to the vision of carbon neutrality proposed by the EU, as well as certain doubts over the plausibility of this declaration. However, South Korea, which is highly dependent on China’s economy, experienced an unintended supply chain shock during the so-called “urea water crisis,” and has come to realize the potential ripple effects caused by China’s accelerated “carbon neutral clock.” This study began with the question of and concern over how China’s carbon neutrality policy will affect not only China but also Korea. Leaving for the future a quantitative impact analysis on the entire carbon neutrality policy accompanied by economic and social transformation, this study chose to analyze the impact of China’s carbon price policy, as the first among developing countries to start a national emissions trading system (ETS).In Chapter 2, following a review of China’s carbon reduction strategy, the development process and characteristics of carbon price policy were analyzed. Aiming to meet its mid- to long-term growth target for 2035 (first stage goal of socialist modernization, doubling GDP from 2020), China has designated the target period for carbon emission peaking and achieving carbon neutrality. It plans to reduce carbon emission intensity (emission to GDP) rather than total carbon emission by 2030, the target year for carbon emission peaking, and its strategy is to reduce total carbon emission quickly by 2060 after reaching the mid- to long-term growth target in 2035. Accordingly, in the short term, it plans to control production in high-emission (i.e. high-pollution) industries to quickly reduce emissions. It is also expected to provide support for the development of energy-saving and low-carbon technologies and the increase of renewable energy facilities in the medium term, and to strongly promote carbon price policies in the long term.China’s current carbon price policy is the ETS, in line with which pilot projects have been implemented in eight regions since 2013 and a national ETS since 2021, with plans to integrate these in the future. The regional ETS, which has accumulated about 10 years of experience, applies paid and free quotas to various industries (differing by region), while the national ETS applies 100% free quotas only for the power generation sector. The Chinese government plans to expand the nationwide ETS to eight major high-emission industries (electric power, petrochemical, chemical industry, building materials, steel, nonferrous metals, paper, and aviation) by 2025. It is also expected to gradually promote the reduction of free quotas and increase the proportion of paid allocation by lowering the benchmark coefficient. The nationwide carbon market remains in the early stages of implementation, but is receiving positive response for establishing a transaction system, improving measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) processes related to carbon data quality, and high carbon transaction prices compared to pilot projects (40-60 yuan/tCO2). However, problems such as lack of mid- to long-term plans, concentration of carbon transactions leading up to the closing date (i.e. market activity problems), and data manipulation by some companies have been exposed as limitations.Chapter 3 examines the issues of the global carbon price system, and identifies discussions on China’s introduction of carbon taxes and responses to the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 68 regions around the world have introduced ETS (32 regions) and carbon taxes (36 regions) as of April 2022, and some regions have implemented carbon taxes as auxiliary measures in fields not included in ETS. Recent issues regarding the cross-border carbon price system include the introduction of CBAM by the EU, and the formation of international climate clubs. The EU’s introduction of CBAM is triggering discussions on the introduction of carbon pricing in several countries, and international climate clubs centered on advanced countries are negotiating tariff cuts on low-carbon items. Meanwhile, China supports the Paris Agreement system, which imposes differentiated responsibilities on developing countries, and is conducting research on carbon pricing (e.g. the establishment of a joint carbon credit market) and related standards through the Belt and Road Initiative.China’s introduction of a carbon tax is likely to come after 2035, when strong carbon reduction targets are proposed, and the ETS system in itself is considered to be limited in achieving the reduction targets. In addition, fields that do not overlap with ETS are expected to be charged at a level similar to emission prices. However, some research institutes in China and researchers have raised the possibility of introducing a limited carbon tax for some industries, a scenario that cannot be completely excluded when preparing response measures to the EU CBAM.China opposes the EU’s introduction of CBAM, characterizing it as a measure to expand the issue of climate change to trade barriers. However, it seems that it is preparing for active negotiations with the EU while analyzing CBAM regulations and their effects. First of all, the Chinese government has supplemented and developed its carbon trading system in response to the EU’s CBAM (internal response), based on which it intends to promote coordination and negotiations with the EU regarding CBAM (external response). In particular, in order to develop its domestic carbon transaction system, the government is ① expanding the scope of industries subject to the national ETS (including the scope of CBAM), ② strengthening the foundation for collecting carbon emission-related data, and strengthening punishment for violators, and is ③ promoting the swift establishment of unified and standardized carbon emission statistics and accounting systems. Meanwhile, on the external side, the Chinese government is trying to propose alternative approaches to reduce its differences in position with the EU. Noteworthy among these are negotiations on whether the Chinese government should be viewed as a taxable entity for carbon emissions produced by Chinese companies in CBAM-applied items.In Chapter 4, the effect of China’s carbon price policy on changes in China’s industrial production and cost was analyzed using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model and interindustry analysis. In particular, in this study, the carbon price by industry required for this impact analysis was not regarded as an exogenous variable, but the carbon emission cost burden rate by industry was estimated and applied to each model by reflecting China’s ETS policy and reality. The results of this analysis estimate the burden rate of carbon emission costs by industry according to China’s carbon price policy at 0.03 to 3.28% (average between 2026 and 2030), and the resulting increase rate of producer prices (production costs) by industry was 0.22 to 2.0%. It is noteworthy that although the carbon emission cost burden ratio was applied only to industries subject to the Chinese carbon price policy, overall production costs increased for the Chinese industry. In addition, some industries showed a higher rate of increase in production costs than those with a high rate of emission cost burden, even though they had very little (e.g. metallic products processing) or no (e.g. electrical equipment, machinery and equipment, construction) emission cost burden. As described above, it is relatively unlikely that China’s ETS will be strongly promoted during the analysis period, so the growth rate of production costs by industry was relatively low. However, the relationship between industries where costs rise, and the extent of this increase, have great implications. It should also be noted that the cost of production in the entire Chinese industry may further increase due to the cost spent in promoting non-market-based carbon reduction policies, which are the key policies of the analysis period. According to the results of our CGE model analysis, most of the industries subject to the Chinese carbon price policy showed a slight decrease in industrial production in the long run, while production increased in industries to which the policy was not applied. Through this, the study confirms the possibility that China’s carbon price policy will change China’s industrial structure in a more eco-friendly direction. The analysis result of this CGE model can be understood as a long-term result that combines various factors such as China’s economic and industrial structure, input factors, new technologies, and changes in trade and investment.In Chapter 5, the impact of China’s carbon price policy on changes in economic relations between Korea and China was analyzed in terms of Korea’s export competitiveness, Korea’s imports from China, and investment in China. Korea’s export competitiveness was analyzed by the CGE model by dividing it into conditions where only China’s carbon price policy is implemented (Scenario 1), only the EU’s CBAM is implemented (Scenario 2), and China’s carbon price policy and EU CBAM are applied at the same time (Scenario 3). The results of the analysis indicate that Korea’s export competitiveness to China’s eco-friendly (non-polluting) market gradually weakens as China’s carbon price policy reduces production in high-pollution industries and increases competitiveness in non-polluting industries in China. However, in relevant industries, Korea’s exports to the world increase in a manner similar to China, and there appears to exist a complementary relationship between Korea and China in the global market related to non-polluting industries. When only CBAM was implemented (Scenario 2), Korea’s exports to the EU increased slightly overall, while China’s exports to the EU showed different levels of increase or decline by industry. When China’s carbon price policy and EU’s CBAM were applied simultaneously (Scenario 3), Korea’s exports to the world increased in most industries, while China’s exports to the world increased in non-polluting industries.The impact of China’s carbon price policy on Korea’s imports and investments in China was calculated based on the premise that the increase in China’s production costs by industry is 100% transferred to consumer prices and export prices, as was demonstrated in Chapter 4. In this case, due to China’s carbon price policy, industries with high growth rates of import prices (= production cost growth rate) to China and high dependence on imports to China included metal processing products, machinery and equipment, non-metallic minerals, automobiles, and primary metals. In particular, in the case of the machinery and equipment, automobile industries, the growth rate of imports to China over the past five years was also high, making the impact of China’s carbon price policy more visible. Chemical products (16.1%), Korea’s second-largest industry in imports from China, and wood and paper, textiles and leather did not show a high rate of increase in import prices. However, all of these industries are highly dependent on imports from China. In addition, especially in the chemical industry, imports from China have also sharply increased, indicating some influence is unavoidable. Meanwhile, computers and electronics (33.8%), Korea’s no. 1 industry in imports from China, are unlikely to have a significant impact because the growth rate of import prices to China is relatively low, as is dependence on imports from China. However, when analyzing detailed items (six-unit HS codes), Korea’s total number of imported items from China in 2021 was 5,470. Among them, 78 items were 100% dependent on imports, 390 items 90% or more, and 975 items 70% or more, demonstrating the importance of managing detailed items that are highly dependent on imports for each industry.When it comes to Korea’s investment in China, the industries that will be most affected by the rise in production costs due to China’s carbon price policy are electrical equipment and automobiles. In addition, the computer and electronics, chemical, non-metallic minerals, and mining industries are expected to be relatively greatly impacted. In particular, electrical equipment is Korea’s second-largest industry of investment in China, and is recently showing rapid growth. In addition, although it is an industry to which the carbon price policy does not apply, the growth rate of production costs is increasing on par with the power generation industry, which has the largest rate of carbon emission cost burden. Because of this, the impact is expected to be the greatest. Along with computers and electronics, which account for the highest proportion of Korea’s investment in China (39.1%), the automobile industry has a relatively low direct impact on rising production costs due to carbon price policies, but is expected to be greatly affected indirectly. For this reason, caution is needed in that if the regulatory intensity for other industries grows higher, the increase in production costs may be further expanded through indirect effects. However, in the computer and electronics industries, which account for the highest proportion of Korea’s investment, import, and export to China, there is a possibility that China’s influence may be offset in that dependence on exports and imports to China may also be lowered if Korea’s investment destinations change due to the reorganization of the global supply chain, expanding role of new production bases such as ASEAN, and reshoring policies by major countries in the future.Chapter 6 summarizes the above analyses and presents the conclusions and implications of this study. First of all, these conclusions were presented in the areas of: ① China’s carbon price policy causing industrial production and cost changes, ② changes in Korea’s export competitiveness due to China’s carbon price policy, ③ China’s carbon price policy and Korea’s import and investment in China, ④ China’s carbon reduction strategy and supply chain risk from China, ⑤ the conditions and timing of China’s introduction of carbon tax, and ⑥ China’s response to CBAM. Finally, implications for the Korean government and companies (industry) were presented in terms of: ① responding to import supply chain risks related to China’s carbon reduction policy, ② seeking cooperation with China, and ③ responding to the EU CBAM. -
The Linkage between International Trade and Labour Standards: Current Status and Implications
Through the evolution of international trade agreements, the conceptual boundaries of ‘trade’ have expanded beyond the simple movement of goods across national borders to a matter of common economic governance among countries. I..
Cheon-Kee Lee Date 2022.12.30
Labor market, Barrier to tradeDownloadContentSummaryThrough the evolution of international trade agreements, the conceptual boundaries of ‘trade’ have expanded beyond the simple movement of goods across national borders to a matter of common economic governance among countries. In particular labor standards have long been a controversial issue in international trade. The linkage between trade and labor standards is expected to emerge as an important trade issue in the future. Internationally recognized labor standards such as those adopted by the International Labor Organization (ILO) have been incorporated into FTAs, and the level of protection of labour rights has been enhanced significantly with respect to both substantive and procedural FTA provisions. Further, there have been a couple of cases where a Party’s failure of FTA labour obligations was referred to judicial review under FTA dispute settlement procedures.This study examines the trade-labour linkage in three main aspects. Firstly, the most traditional approach of linking trade and labour standard has been to improve labour standards in trading partners through bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements including FTAs. This trend is in line with the recent increase in litigation between countries under a FTA dispute settlement procedure. Since 2018, there have been a total of 18 cases where Parties invoked FTA dispute settlement provisions, four of which were labour- or environment-related disputes. It is also worth noting that two out of these four cases were complaints filed against Korea.The main components of FTA labour standards include (ⅰ) incorporation of ILO international labour standards (ⅱ) non-derogation (ⅲ) effective implementation of labour obligations (ⅳ) labour cooperation, and (ⅴ) corporate social responsibility (CSR). More recent FTAs also cover issues such as gender equality, protection of migrant workers' labour rights, and import prohibition on products made by forced labour. With respect to enforceability and dispute settlement, one should pay particular attention to the Facility-Specific Rapid-Response Labor Mechanism or “RRM”, which was introduced by the United States for the first time in USMCA. Under the RRM, the Parties can address settle labour-related matters more quickly and effectively than the traditional ‘state-to-state’ dispute settlement system, by directly targeting ‘facilities’ responsible for alleged infringements of freedom of association or the right to collective bargaining.Further, the Panel of Experts ruling made on January 20, 2021 under the Trade and Sustainable Development (“TSD”) Chapter of the Korea-EU FTA would likely have an important implication in future negotiations, interpretation and application of FTA labour standards. In that case the Panel held that government measures that address labour rights, irrespective of whether such measures were actually targeted at industries, companies or workers engaged in international trade, can essentially be ‘trade-related’ measures under the Korea-EU FTA. According to the Panel, trade and fundamental labour rights are intrinsically linked.Secondly, more recently a series of attempts have been made to introduce a new trade-labour linkage model that can be distinguished from the previous FTA labour standards, as witnessed in the ongoing IPEF negotiations. Labour issues are being dealt with as a core agenda in Pillar 1 led by the United States. Theoretically, the IPEF Pillar I labour standards could be (ⅰ) USMCA or USMCA plus level, (ⅱ) U.S. FTA level prior to USMCA, or (ⅲ) based on ILO international labour standards. For instance, in the negotiation the United States might try to link the issue of forced labour to supply chain issues to match the USMCA level. It is also important to note that without the obligation to prohibit imports made by forced labour, a certain level of leverage can be made against forced labour-issues within IPEF Parties’ domestic law and policies, via the incorporation clause of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The same declaration refers to the principle of 'elimination of forced labour' as a fundamental labour right. Thus for IPEF Parties it would likely be an important task to make eliminate use of fource labour economy-wide. It would be wise to start from sectors and industries where concerns have been raised related to the possible use of forced labour. The Trafficking in Persons Report of July 2022 and the Report on Human Trafficking in the Seafood Supply Chain of 2020 by the U.S. Department of State can be a starting point.Thirdly, in addition to the trade-labour linkages at the international level, the linkage at domestic level appears to be in full swing. In particular, import restrictions on products made by forced labour during product production process are becoming visible, especially in the U.S. and EU. The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act or “UFLPA”, which went into effect on June 21, 2022 in the U.S., is the most obvious example. The UFLPA provides for (ⅰ) import prohibition of goods made by forced labour and (ⅱ) sanctions against individuals and businesses related to the use of forced labour in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR), China. Under the rebuttable presumption under the UFLPA, it has been reported that a considerable amount of imports from XUAR have currently been withheld because importers could not demonstrate that the product at hand was not produced in XUAR nor otherwise using forced labour. According to the UFLPA Enforcement Strategy published on June 17, 2022, polysilicon, cotton, tomatoes, and apparel products were designated as 'high-priority sectors for enforcement' and are receiving the most strict import restrictions. Further, since its implementation, a number of enforcement cases have been confirmed on other sectors including electronics, agricultural products (other than tomatoes and tomatoe products), pharmaceuticals, and base metals. It is expected that CBP will continue to expand UFLPA enforcement and eventually require supply chain tracking for a wider range of products.In a similar vein, the European Commission announced on September 14, 2022 the Proposal for a Regulation on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market. The proposal prohibits the placing on the EU market of products made with forced labour as well as their export from the EU. Unlike the UFLPA, the EU proposal does not explicitly refers to XUAR or China, but are designed to be universally applicable to all products regardless of country of origin (even including EU member states within its internal market). It is expected that the U.S, and EU will develop a consistent trend to make stricter labour standard compliance mandatory for the entire supply chain of products.Based on the analysis above, this study advises that the Korean government identify trade and labour-related concerns raised or likely to be raised by other trading partners and rationales behind it, and to assess possibility of such concerns to become a formal trade disputes filed against Korea through FTA dispute settlement mechanisms. It is important to take such assessments into consideration when preparing future negotiation strategies for FTA/IPEF labour standards. Also, clarifying the scope, legal nature, and meaning of each FTA labour standard would be a meaningful task to secure legal stability and predictability, and to prevent trade disputes related to FTA labour obligations.It is also necessary to prepare for the possibility that FTA labour standards may act as regulatory barriers to Korean companies that are established in the third countries and produce and export goods to the U.S. For instance, the IPEF can have significant implications because many ASEAN countries such as Vietnam, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia are participating in the Pillar 1 negotiation.For the IPEF negotiations, since market access is not a subject of negotiation in IPEF, it is necessary to think about what can be presented as a carrot to the stick of strict labour standards. If the IPEF includes an enforcement mechanism, such an enforcement mechanism should largely be based on either incentives or penalties for compliance and breaches of labour standards.Lastly, it is necessary to be take caution in introducing laws and systems for regulatory measures that link labour standards and supply chains, such as measures to prohibit imports made by forced labour. To prepare for labour standards and supply chain-linked regulatory measures and minimize the adverse impacts, this study advises that the Korean government consider establishment of a single response system that can jointly respond at the national level to such regulations. -
Liberalization of the Global Market for Environmental Goods and Services: International Discussions, Trends, and Economic Effects
The international community is striving to establish norms concerning the environmental market. It endeavors to secure a free and fair trade order, and contribute to achieving carbon neutrality and sustainability. In this study, w..
Jukwan Lee et al. Date 2022.12.30
Free trade, Environmental policyDownloadContentSummary정책연구브리핑The international community is striving to establish norms concerning the environmental market. It endeavors to secure a free and fair trade order, and contribute to achieving carbon neutrality and sustainability. In this study, we first examine related discussions, then review the current status and market openness of environmental goods and services. Analyzing the effect of market liberalization on the Korean economy, we conclude with policy implications which could contribute to the Korean government’s policy making in the subject.Chapter 2 examines each country and international organizations’ definition on the environmental industry, goods and services, then it introduces the formation of related trade norms. Environmental goods are generally defined as products contributing to environmental protection and sustainability, and based on the degree of eco-friendliness throughout the product’s life-cycle. However, what constitutes environmental goods is a controversial issue among countries which depends on political and economic interests. As for environmental services, the UN, the OECD, and the EU define them as both including environmental protection and resource management, whereas the WTO focuses on pollution management.Multilateral organizations such as the WTO, the OECD, the APEC and the UNCTAD have made great efforts to establish the scope of environmental good and services and related trade norms, but these ultimately came to a standstill. Current discussions at the Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions (TESSD) involving the liberalization of environmental goods and services, as well as bilateral and regional talks such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), are focusing on efforts to form related norms, toward which promising results are being seen.Chapter 3 examines the status of market openness and trade up to the latest (year 2021) using a broad list that encompasses the discussion of environmental goods and services in the international community. First, environmental goods are already subject to relatively low tariff rates. Second, countries which took part in the environmental goods negotiation had lower tariff rates compared to those which were not. Third, Korea’s effectively applied tariff rates on environmental goods are lower than 5%. While most environmental products Korea imports from the EU, USA and India are duty free, 40% of Chinese goods are subject to tariffs. Fourth, Korea’s top trade partner in environmental goods is China. For environmental services, the concession analysis suggested that Korea’s WTO concession level is low and concessions in subsequently signed FTAs only showed partial improvements.Chapter 4 considers the liberalization of the environmental industry. Based on the empirical analysis regarding the effect of environmental norms developed to date, we suggest that environmental measures have a negative effect on trade (in this case, imports). Followed by this, our simulations predicted that opening the environmental goods and services’ market would yield positive results. However, this effect was greatly affected by the composition of the participating countries, and particularly the participation of China, which accounts for a large proportion of the global environmental goods and services market.Accordingly, we expect Korea to benefit from the formation of norms and the lowering of trade costs following the liberalization of environmental goods and services’ market. Based on such reasoning, chapter 5 gives some guidance about future multilateral, regional, bilateral discussions, and domestic actions related to the liberalization of environmental goods and services. -
A Comparative Study on ODA Policy Process: Public Awareness as a Policy Motive
For a decade since joining the OECD DAC in 2010, Korea’s ODA saw immense improvement in terms of its scale, governance structure, and strategy. This was efficiently achievable through a process of fast-following the examples prov..
Jeonghwan Yun et al. Date 2022.12.30
ODA, Foreign aidDownloadContentSummaryFor a decade since joining the OECD DAC in 2010, Korea’s ODA saw immense improvement in terms of its scale, governance structure, and strategy. This was efficiently achievable through a process of fast-following the examples provided by leading global donors. However, such condensed development of institutions was insufficient to ensure the holistic improvement of all related governance systems. Especially, the policies and strategies for public relations were deemed of secondary importance, compared to the urgency of governance directly related to proper delivery of the aid. For Korea to further contribute to the global society as a leading donor, it has become essential to clearly elaborate its long-run ODA policy based on solid policy motives to support it.In this study, we revisit one of the most important intrinsic policy motives: the public awareness on development cooperation, and where it lies in Korea’s ODA. To elaborate the current status and potential roles of public opinion regarding the current ODA system, we conduct comparative analyses with other donors to define the main challenges for Korea. Furthermore, we conduct individual level empirical analyses using harmonized survey data accumulated over 11 years, and propose a strategy to enhance public awareness in Korea.In chapter 2, we first quantitatively assess the levels of correspondence between Korea’s ODA and public awareness. We find some economic outcomes agree with the public awareness on the economic importance of ODA. However, from other outcomes of our interest, such as scale, resource allocation, and policy goals, we find vast discrepancy between public perceptions of ODA and the actual administration of ODA programs. Thus, we raise the need for enhancing a strategy regarding public relations.In chapter 3, we present examples of a strong governance system and concrete strategy for public relations within other donor countries. We exemplify these public relations strategies in two categories: 1) channels to ensure public opinion is accurately reflected in ODA policy, such as coordination with the civil society, and 2) efforts to enhance the public awareness and understanding, such as Education for Sustainable Development (ESD).The first section presents a taxonomy on the ODA policy making process. We elaborate the role of each stakeholder, including the civil society, and how their voice contributes to ODA policy making. The recent reform in the British ODA system and its communication throughout the reform process exemplify the importance of public opinion in ODA policy.The second section of the chapter documents public awareness in the selected donor countries and their strategies. Their ODA institutes had a well established goal and curriculum. The curriculum was designed to provide an interactive learning opportunity on development cooperation, and various entities from both the public and private sector collaborate to provide such opportunities through formal and informal education. Public relation efforts through ESD strategies within these selected countries provide an important implication to Korea.Chapter 4 scrutinizes the current status of public awareness in Korea, based on 11 waves of individual level survey data. The first half of the chapter documents the dynamic pattern of public awareness, including level of support for ODA. While the aggregate level of support was not dramatically lower then those of the countries examined in Chapter 3, most of this support was composed of rather lukewarm support for Korea’s ODA contribution. This finding implies that high awareness and support from the public are less likely to be a result of strategic effort, and more likely to originate from the generosity and goodwill of the people.Based on the findings outlined above, the latter half of the chapter is devoted to discussing and suggesting a valid public awareness strategy for Korea. We exploit the results of our “Public Awareness for Development Cooperation Survey 2022,” designed and conducted specifically for this study. Underwhelmingly, we found lukewarm supporters tended to respond only to graphic descriptions of the hardships in developing countries designed for “emotional appeal.” However, we also identified an encouraging result on how even those lukewarm supporters with previous experience with ESD, as well as those who trust international organizations or partner countries, still respond to articles with “factual descriptions” of the current situation. Such a complementary effect shows how trust towards the partner country and global players provide the crucial social capital that the majority of the public lack of, and therefore should be slowly fostered by providing them with more opportunities for ESD. This finding echos with the survey result where 74% of our respondents answered they above all “wished to know whether Korean ODA did contribute to better lives in the recipient country.”This study illustrates the urgent need for Korea’s ODA to establish public trust. Such a challenge requires to be tackled by strengthening partnerships with the civil society, and substantiate the communication channels within Korea’s ODA governance system. Additionally, more ESD opportunities should be provided through both formal and informal education systems. While the government should take a strong initiative on designing detailed curriculum and mobilizing resources, cooperation between ministries and agencies is crucial, and a stronger partnership with resourceful private sector entities, such as CSOs, is likely to help effective implementation. -
China’s Medium- to Long-term Trade Strategy and Korea-China Cooperation Plans
Korea and China celebrated their 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations in 2022, commemorating the remarkable economic results through economic exchanges based on complementary industrial structures. However, in recent years, ec..
Seungshin Lee et al. Date 2022.12.30
Economic cooperation, Trade policy ChinaDownloadContentSummaryKorea and China celebrated their 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations in 2022, commemorating the remarkable economic results through economic exchanges based on complementary industrial structures. However, in recent years, economic exchanges have entered a phase of contraction due to various factors such as geopolitical challenges, the influence of U.S.-China competition, and the shrinking industrial competitiveness gap between Korea and China. Now, Korea needs to make efforts to secure stable economic cooperation engines while readjusting its existing economic cooperation structure with China. In particular, it is necessary to create a foundation for cooperation between the two countries on the new trade issues such as supply chain reorganization, digital trade, climate change response, development and health cooperation covered in this report. When analyzing China’s mid- to long-term trade strategy on new trade issues, it is divided into areas where China and Korea are expected to form a competitive structure and areas that require cooperation.Regarding the reorganization of the supply chain, the possibility that China will expand its own supply capacity for basic resources and intermediate goods, while limiting exports to promote its domestic circulation strategy and economic security, is a significant challenge factor in Korea-China economic relations. In particular, demands for supply chain strategies to reduce dependence on China and diversify sources are increasing due to uncertainties in China’s supply chain. Measures are being taken to fortify supply chains of major resources such as semiconductors, batteries, and rare earths, while restrictions are being made placed on Korean companies’ entry into the Chinese market in the form of electric vehicle battery subsidies. In response to this reorganization of supply chains, we propose establishing a comprehensive national supply chain strategy to prepare Korea’s economy for intensifying competition in tech sectors between the U.S. and China, and internalization of China’s supply chain. In the short term, it is necessary to prepare countermeasures focusing on supply chain stability and resilience through supply chain risk checks for Korea’s major industries. In the mid- to long-term, it is necessary to prepare countermeasures for a long-term vision that focuses on digitalization and “greenization” supply chains, along with diversification of production bases (China+1 or China+N). The second direction of response is the establishment of a multi-layered cooperation platform for supply chain stability. To this end, efforts are needed to actively participate in East Asian cooperation platforms such as the RCEP, CPTPP, IPEF, DEPA, and the U.S.-East Asia Semiconductor Supply Chain Resilience Working Group to stabilize Korean companies’ supply chains and reflect Korean companies’ policy demands. While promoting cooperation focused on technology and talent training cooperation with the U.S., such as the U.S.-East Asia Semiconductor Resilience Working Group, it is necessary to establish a cooperative channel to stabilize the supply chain when considering how closely linked it remains to China. As for the direction of cooperation with China related to the restructuring of the supply chain, the first proposal of this study is to establish a stable supply chain channel between Korea and China. It is necessary to establish a channel related to supply chain recovery and stabilization in which the Korean and Chinese governments and private sectors jointly participate, focusing on unexpected supply chain disruption and post-resilience, so that the channel can be activated in time to solve supply chain problems in case of supply chain disruption. The second direction of cooperation is to promote cooperation related to global supply chain governance. The Industrial Network Recovery and Security International Cooperation Initiative proposed by the Chinese government to establish governance related to global supply chain stability is yet to gain much influence in global supply chains, but the Chinese government seems willing to cooperate internationally in digitalization and greening efforts. After all, since digitalization and greening of supply chains are linked to digital norms such as data movement, localization of computing facilities, and prohibition of source code demands, it is necessary to promote cooperation with the Chinese government on new and common norms. As the last direction of cooperation, it is necessary to explore the possibility of supply chain cooperation such as technology and overseas mining development projects with China.As our response to digital trade, we propose establishing a trade strategy that reflects the characteristics of China’s trade agreements. The characteristics of China’s digital trade norms include the composition of the provisions of the agreement, which are different for each target country, and the ambiguity of the terms of the agreement. The fact that the terms of the agreement are structured differently, depending on the various interests of the countries involved in the trade agreement, means that there may be ample room for negotiation depending on the circumstances of the two countries when concluding or revising a trade agreement with China in the future. Ambiguity due to unclear stipulations on the terms of the trade agreement is an issue to keep in mind when concluding follow-up negotiations with China, so careful coordination and confirmation of the text will be necessary at the negotiating stage. On the other hand, Korea still lacks response to the introduction of the concept of digital trade regulation under the U.S.-led competitive neutrality principle, which China recognizes as a new challenge, so it is necessary to improve domestic regulations and clarify its position in the international community with countries under similar economic and related industrial development conditions. In addition, the establishment of a Chinese-style digital trade norm model should be addressed in line with the development of global trade norms.As a digital trade cooperation plan between Korea and China, another direction to explore is the promotion of cross-border cooperation in e-commerce. The revitalization of commodity trading through a digital platform that can lower trade transaction costs is expected to be a promising alternative route to the Korea-China commodity trade, which has been shrinking in recent years. Korea and China need to move away from the industrial cooperation model promoted in the form of the traditional division of labor in manufacturing and seek new opportunities for economic cooperation in the field of digital trade. Now, exports to China should move away from commodity-oriented trade and expand the target and scope of cooperation by expanding trade through digital products and online platforms. In light of current circumstances, exports to China should move away from commodity- oriented trade and expand the objects and scope of cooperation by expanding trade through digital products trade and online platforms. To this end, it is necessary to utilize China’s digital market, which is a major export destination for Korean digital contents, and to prepare countermeasures to minimize the institutional impact of strengthening digital regulations in China. China is a market that accounts for about 81% of Korea’s total e-commerce exports, and considering future market potential, it is necessary to come up with countermeasures to minimize the institutional impact of strengthening digital regulations in China. Korea and China are undergoing follow-up negotiations on the Korea-China FTA, which includes the first e-commerce chapter among China’s trade agreements, and are very active in cooperating with global digital trade norms such as the RCEP entry into force and DEPA entry procedures. These efforts by the two countries can be seen as an inevitable effort to adapt to the era of digital transformation and achieve stable economic development. Applying for DEPA membership, South Korea and China need to establish channels and cooperation platforms to communicate changes in digital-related policies and laws of the two countries. Through dialogue channels with China, Korea should strengthen transparency regarding mutual domestic laws and policies, including regulations on data and e-commerce, and strive to improve regulations that hinder digital cooperation between the two countries.In response to climate change, both Korea and China have declared carbon neutrality and are promoting step-by-step policies. The de-carbonization strategy can be an opportunity for cooperation discussions as an issue that both Korea and China must jointly respond to at the same time as a risk factor affecting the supply chain. Both countries are using the realization of carbon neutrality as an opportunity to transform industrial structure and upgrade industrial value chains, not just from an environmental protection perspective. As a result, there may be further competition in new energy vehicles, such as hydrogen vehicles and electric vehicles, related to carbon neutrality and alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power, and there is good potential to strengthen technological cooperation and mutual investment cooperation in new fields. To enable agile response to climate change, we present the following three response directions. First, Korea should prepare for China’s transition to a green and low-carbon-centered industrial structure. Efforts to find new business opportunities in green production facilities, renewable energy, carbon capture technology, and energy management systems are needed to prepare a public trade strategy centered on eco-friendly green consumer goods in response to China’s eco-friendly industrial restructuring. The second direction of response is to respond to discussions on trade norms related to climate change led by the United States and the EU. The discussion of international trade norms related to climate change may act as a trade pressure factor for Korea in conjunction with the U.S.-China trade conflict. In preparation for this, Korea must establish a strategic position on the development of related discussions, and should review joint response measures with China as a cooperative agenda. In addition, it is necessary to respond to trade risks related to renewable energy supply chains. To this end, it is necessary to conduct due diligence on corporate supply chains and diversify supply chains to reduce dependence on China such as solar and electric vehicle batteries. As a direction of cooperation related to climate change response, it is necessary to maintain the existing dialogue on climate and environment issues. Discussions on cooperation in the environmental sector between Korea and China have continued even during the COVID-19 pandemic and U.S.-China strategic competition, such as continuing joint research to reduce fine dust between Korea and China, launching a carbon-neutral consultative body, and initiating policy and technology exchanges. In response, we propose to resume the Joint Committee on Climate Change Cooperation between Korea and China.The direction of cooperation with China in the field of development and health cooperation is, above all, a joint response to the COVID-19 crisis. To this end, it is necessary to continuously promote cooperation between Korea and China to respond to COVID-19. Meanwhile, China is already promoting health and digital cooperation in Southeast Asia through the Health Silk Road and Digital Silk Road strategies. In terms of diversification of cooperation fields for joint entry into the market of third countries between Korea and China, it is also necessary to consider cooperation measures linking development and health cooperation issues. Joint entry into third country markets is a cooperative issue that has been steadily discussed between Korea and China, but has not produced many tangible results. Therefore, it is necessary to expand the scope of cooperation in third country markets. In addition to infrastructure cooperation discussed in the existing cooperation field, new cooperation issues include preventing infectious diseases, supplying vaccines, supporting digital infrastructure construction in developing countries, and developing a remote education cooperation model considering the pandemic. In addition, cooperation in establishing a new infectious disease response cooperation system that may occur in the future can be considered. The establishment of a cooperative system between the two countries could include cooperation in various areas such as sharing information on infectious diseases, developing joint education and training programs, expanding communication channels between health experts, and mutual support systems for quarantine supplies. -
Russia-Ukraine War and Major Central Eastern European States’ Geopolitical Crisis Responses: Focusing on Energy Issues
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 caused a security crisis threatening Ukraine’s very existence. This security crisis caused severe security issues in Ukraine’s surrounding region, Central Eastern Europe, and challe..
Moosung Lee et al. Date 2022.12.30
Economic security, Energy industry Russia EurasiaDownloadContentSummaryRussia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 caused a security crisis threatening Ukraine’s very existence. This security crisis caused severe security issues in Ukraine’s surrounding region, Central Eastern Europe, and challenged Europe’s security architecture. Additionally, Central Eastern European States have experienced energy security issues due to their heavy reliance on Russian oil and natural gas. Central Eastern European states are showing their caution and devising countermeasures according to their practical interests. However, each state has their different historical contexts and practical interests depending on their individual establishments of relationships with Russia. This study particularly investigates the political, economic and policy implications of these Central Eastern European states amid the escalation of this geopolitical crisis and the conundrums caused by energy security issues in the Central Eastern European States.The overall structure of this study is as follows. First, the backdrop upon which the study was conducted and its significance were presented. Second, the theoretical framework of the study was established by reviewing previous empirical studies. Third, the context of the Russia-Ukraine war was provided by tracking the development of bilateral relations and eventually examining the leading causes of this war. Fourth, the regional responses were investigated by examining developments in Central Eastern Europe (Visegrad Four, Romania and Bulgaria), Western Europe and the EU. In this process, this study thoroughly analyzed and compared how these states have responded to possible crises like security and energy issues. Finally, the conclusion of this study summarizes the main points and, additionally, draws geo-economic and geo-political implications and future prospects for Korea. -
Climate Change and its Impact on Bangladesh
Climate change poses one of the greatest threats to humanity and nature, with Bangladesh recognized as one of the most vulnerable countries due to its geographic location. The lives of Bangladeshi residents are directly or indirec..
Yoon Jae Ro et al. Date 2022.12.30
Economic security, Economic cooperation India and South AsiaDownloadContentSummaryClimate change poses one of the greatest threats to humanity and nature, with Bangladesh recognized as one of the most vulnerable countries due to its geographic location. The lives of Bangladeshi residents are directly or indirectly affected by frequent heat waves, droughts, and floods caused by climate change. Various statistics and studies show that Bangladesh’s vulnerability to climate change is not only affected by long-term changes such as a rise in global temperature and precipitation patterns but also by mid- to short-term changes such as sea-level rise and an increase in natural disasters.Bangladesh is considered one of the most vulnerable countries to flooding and rising sea levels, as it has the world’s largest delta area and more than 70% of its total land area is less than one meter above sea level. Extreme climate change and flooding are causing a decline in agricultural production in Bangladesh’s major agricultural areas, making it increasingly difficult to secure sufficient supplies of drinking water. Additionally, urban slumming due to excessive migration to inland cities by coastal residents who have lost their livelihoods is emerging as a new social problem.The Bangladesh government has presented various policy directions to address this situation. It has included climate change response strategies in its long-term economic development policies, such as Delta 2100 and PP2041. Development policies such as 8FYP and ADP focus on flood response capabilities and water resource management. Bangladesh has also established various national plans and initiatives related to climate change mitigation and adaptation to actively respond to the impacts of climate change that threaten the population.Furthermore, Bangladesh, as the chair of the Climate Vulnerable Countries Forum, is a leading voice in the international community for climate-vulnerable countries. In 2010, Bangladesh became the first least-developed country to establish a trust fund for the Climate Vulnerable Countries Forum, encouraging the international community to provide financial support for climate-vulnerable countries.Bangladesh was the world’s second-largest recipient of climate change ODA aid in 2020, but there is still room to improve Korea’s support for the nation. Bangladesh is a core partner country for Korea in ODA activities and presents good prospects for expanding the size of cooperation in the future. With relatively limited resources available, Korea needs to plan and implement projects that meet the needs of the recipient country and Korea’s fields of expertise as efficiently as possible. It will also be necessary to derive cooperation measures in each field in the direction of supporting Bangladesh’s efforts to respond to climate change. -
10 Years of North Korea’s External Relations in the Kim Jong-un Era: Evaluation and Prospects
The purpose of this research is to investigate the characteristics of North Korea’s foreign policy that it pursued by dividing Chairman Kim Jeong-un’s reign into three segments, Ascension to Power (2011 Dec-2012), First Regime (..
Jangho Choi et al. Date 2022.12.30
Economic relations, North Korean economy North KoreaDownloadContentSummary정책연구브리핑The purpose of this research is to investigate the characteristics of North Korea’s foreign policy that it pursued by dividing Chairman Kim Jeong-un’s reign into three segments, Ascension to Power (2011 Dec-2012), First Regime (2013-2017) and Second Regime (2018-2021), and based on these findings, predict the direction of North Korea’s changing economy. For this, we reviewed the changes in North Korea’s surrounding foreign landscape its policy responses, foreign trade, bilateral relations (China, Russia, the United States, Japan) and multilateral relations (UN Agencies, Multilateral Councils).In chapter two, we introduced the changes that North Korea faced during the ten years of Chairman Kim Jeong-un’s regime with the surrounding foreign landscape and its domestic policy responses. During the First Regime, we reviewed (1) the May 24th Measures and the strained inter-Korean relations causing North Korea’s economy to be increasingly dependent on China (2) Deterioration of North Korea-China relations after Jang Song-thaek's execution, (3) China’s tightening of anthracite (hard coal) environmental regulations, (4) UN Security Council’s tougher sanctions on North Korea, (5) implementation of economic reforms such as North Korean-style economic management for domestic economic policy, (6) designation of Special Economic Zone to stimulate foreign trade and foreign investment, (7) real estate development to build high-rise apartments and amusement facilities, (8) declaration of completing the simultaneous economic and nuclear development after North Korea’s nuclear test.During the Second Regime, we discussed the changes in both domestic and foreign landscape, in addition to North Korea’s policies, (9) UN Security Council’s fully-fledged implementation of sanctions on North Korea, (10) support from the international community for the Korean peninsula to show mood of conciliation, (11) The Hanoi Summit ending in failure (12) borders closed due to COVID-19, for domestic policy, (13) negotiations on the denuclearization of North Korea and 2019 Koreas–United States DMZ Summit, (14) attempts to transition to a “normal country” and join the international community, (15) failure of the five year economic plan (2016-2020), (16) emphasis on self-reliance and self-sufficiency.Throughout Chairman Kim’s regime, the foreign landscape deteriorated. Development of a nuclear arsenal dealt a decisive blow to its foreign relations and eventually grinded to a halt with the spread of COVID-19 in 2020. In response, North Korea has attempted to normalize its cooperative relations with China and Russia while tightening its grip on its society and economy.In chapter three, we outlined the trends of trade in Kim Jong-un’s regime, evaluating and comparing the direction and the impact of North Korea’s trade policy for each segment. Although expansion of trade slowed during the First Regime it still maintained strong levels. Trade however, significantly shrank due to the sanctions against North Korea and the COVID-19 pandemic. During the First Regime, North Korea sought the expansion and development of its international economy by deregulating and decentralizing trade, increase exports of processed goods, diversification, and localization. In order to achieve this, North Korea implemented policies that brought limited results such as increasing exports of textile goods, expanding trading areas with China, and import substitution for limited items. However, in the international economy of the Second Regime, North Korea’s trade regressed to its augmenting role of establishing an independent national economy, being greatly reduced in its size, variety of items and the sectors of trade. If this trend of harming trade interests continues, it will most definitely harm the North Korean economy.In chapter four, we examined the political and economic relations with its neighboring stakeholders surrounding the Korean Peninsula with changes to the foreign landscape, such as China, the United States, Russia, and Japan. From a political viewpoint, Chairman Kim’s regime of ten years did less harm than good to North Korea’s foreign relations. Relations between China and North Korea improved, Summits of Heads of State between Chairman Kim and Korea, US, China, and Russia were utilized as a propaganda to show North Korea as a nuclear power to the international community. This in turn became an opportunity to bring together a counterweight against America in the midst of increasing tensions between US-China Strategic Competition and the Indo-Pacific Strategy. From an economic viewpoint, economic cooperation with China and Russia which limited the number of countries, regions and industries was not enough for the North Korean economy to improve. The causes of the limitations of economic cooperation were due to the state capacity focused on completing nuclear armament, international isolation due to sanctions, border closures due to COVID-19, and the high risk of investment in North Korea. In the future, we expect North Korea to strengthen its strategic cooperation with China in all sectors based on establishing a “New Era of North Korea-China Relations” in order to fulfill the requirements of the five-year economic plan by 2025. In addition, we expect North Korea to maintain good neighborly relations with Russia and continue to have minimal exchanges in areas that can act to their advantage. North Korea-US relations will depend on US-China relations while North Korea-Japan relations would depend on North Korea-US relations. This is because the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, US-China Conflict, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine caused the deteriorated America’s relations between North Korea, China and Russia while President Biden’s main agenda of the Indo-Pacific Strategy of the US strengthened alliance of the ROK-US-Japan, naturally forming a conflict structure between North Korea-China-Russia and ROK-US-Japan.In Chapter Five, we focused on multilateral cooperation and aid to North Korea. While it is true that North Korea and the international community both respectively have a certain desire for multilateral cooperation, we evaluate that due to the disagreements stemming from differing perspectives, correspondence, and issues, there were no notable results. For North Korea, there is a demand for multilateral cooperation in terms in terms of revitalizing trade and investment, economic development, and financing. Although multilateral cooperation for North Korea brings membership of International Financial Institutions a necessary step and preemptively requires North Korea’s regime change, if we look into North Korea’s demands, we can see that there is a distinctive gap in what North Korea desires and what the international community requires. While North Korea has requested development cooperation aid, the international community has remained responding with humanitarian aid. This unbalance has shifted further with North Korea’s successive nuclear tests and tougher sanctions against North Korea. While North Korea’s multilateral cooperation policy in the Kim Jong-un regime stems from the differences between domestic and foreign political situation, there are still significant barriers due to exogenous factors, such as COVID-19, which has, with or without North Korea’s intentions has become an inhibiting factor. The UN sanctions and COVID-19 has physically prevented any projects that North Korea has or could receive from being implemented, and the reality is that is difficult for any multilateral cooperation projects to be carried out regardless of the intentions of North Korea or the international community. In order to revitalize the international community's support for North Korea, North Korea needs to show a more assertive attitude toward multilateral cooperation, and we judge that this same attitude had led to its active participation on the UN SDGs in 2016. If a compromise can reached between the international community and North Korea's demands (requirements) while implementing the UN SDGs, we expect this to provide an opportunity for North Korea's multilateral cooperation to become more active in the future.Chapter six summarizes the discussions from chapter two to five and draw predictions on Chairman Kim Jeong-un Third Regime on (1) changes with North Korea’s economic policy, (2) tectonic shifts in the foreign landscape, (3) transition to living with COVID-19, and (4) North Korea’s attitude to membership in international organizations.We reviewed three possible scenarios that showed the direction of changes with North Korea’s economic policy. The first scenario was if the UN sanctions and North Korea’s COVID-19 restrictions showed little to no changes to the present. The second scenario was the sanctions remaining the same, but North Korea transition to living with COVID-19. The third scenario was the sanctions being lifted with transition to living with COVID-19. Of the three, the first is the most feasible scenario.With tectonic shifts in the foreign landscape, we reviewed deepening US-China conflicts and the Russo-Ukrainian War. We predicted deepening US-China conflicts would lead China to create a new multilateral Councils and North Korea partaking in it, China increasing its aid to North Korea and deepening their relations, the Russo-Ukrainian War prolonging with labor and supply shortages surfacing and North Korea expanding cooperation with war supplies and laborers, Russia’s aid to North Korea, (such as science and technology).With predictions of COVID-19 measures, we discussed that it would be inevitable for North Korea to transition into living with COVID-19. In addition to the zero-COVID policy, we also reviewed North Korea's focus on agriculture and quarantine policies. In order for North Korea to transition to living with COVID-19, China’s zero-COVID policies need to transition as well to a living with COVID-19 with North Korea also requiring COVID vaccinations.Finally, we predicted North Korea’s attitude to membership in international organizations. We selected disclosing economic statistics, denuclearization, and resolution of human rights to be obstacles to North Korea’s membership to international organizations, but would probably not surface if the organization was led by China. However, we also expressed that even if North Korea does join a Chinese-led organization, it will still have to face these issues, and North Korea would have to display more transparency as China had in its initial economic reforms and opening. In the end, if North Korea does not guarantee a certain amount of minimal transparency, it would be difficult for North Korea to obtain membership. -
Quality Assessment in Development Evaluations: Current Practices and Implications
The importance of quality management in development evaluations has become increasingly recognized, particularly in the context of efforts to improve development effectiveness. International organizations and donor agencies have e..
Eunsuk Lee and Chami Park Date 2022.12.30
ODADownloadContentSummaryThe importance of quality management in development evaluations has become increasingly recognized, particularly in the context of efforts to improve development effectiveness. International organizations and donor agencies have established evaluation systems and processes to ensure quality of evaluations. In Korea, evaluation was made mandatory for ODA implementing agencies in 2014, resulting in a surge in the number of agencies conducting evaluations as well as evaluation reports they produce. However, there remains limited awareness among many institutions regarding the issue of quality in evaluations, with the lack of a system to assess the quality of evaluation reports, causing a particular concern.This study aims to explore the evaluation quality management systems and practices in place at international organizations and development agencies. The goal is to provide implications and recommendations for establishing quality standards for evaluation and introducing a quality management system to enhance the evaluation quality of Korea’s ODA. The study focuses on the quality assessment systems and methods leading up to the evaluation report, which is the final outcome of the evaluation process.Chapter 2 highlights the current management practices for evaluation quality at multilateral organizations, with a particular emphasis on the United Nations funds and programs. The chapter analyzes the cases of UNICEF and UNFPA in detail. Initially introduced to enhance the quality of decentralized evaluations at regional and country office levels, the quality management system has since evolved into a broader axis of evaluation management. Both UNICEF and UNFPA have implemented organization-wide evaluation quality management systems (GEROS and EQAA, respectively) and regularly conduct quality assurance and assessment of the entire evaluation process and reports based on relevant quality standards. Their integrated quality assessment includes central evaluations carried out by the evaluation departments of the organization headquarters. Similarly, other UN agencies have adopted comparable quality assessment systems, engaging external evaluators for the task.Chapter 3 examines the evaluation quality management practices of major bilateral donors and analyzes the quality assessment system in use at Norad and KOICA. In bilateral donor agencies, quality assessment is often conducted as part of internal evaluation management, unlike the standardized approach adopted by many UN agencies. Most bilateral donors, including Norad, undertake internal quality reviews or external meta-evaluations. KOICA has established the Independent Evaluation Panel to perform regular quality assessment which involves both internal and external reviews.The key characteristics of evaluation quality management identified from the four case studies can be summarized as follows: first, quality management is integrated into institutional evaluation systems based on widely adopted evaluation principles in development cooperation, such as the evaluation norms of the United Nations Evaluation Group or the evaluation quality standards of the OECD DAC; second, quality assessments are conducted on a rolling basis by external experts to ensure objectivity, using detailed checklists as a guide; and third, these assessments serve multiple purposes, including assessing the usability of evaluation results, accumulating evaluation data, and identifying best practices. To optimize the utilization of evaluation quality assessment system, it is essential to secure procedural legitimacy and consistency across the quality standards among those who conduct the assessment.To ensure the long-term effectiveness of evaluations undertaken by Korea’s ODA implementing agencies, it is crucial to develop guidelines for managing their overall evaluation quality based on an assessment of evaluation procedures as well as organizational and human capacity. A comprehensive analysis of the merits and challenges of quality assurance systems being used by other donors would yield insights into how evaluation quality management could be institutionalized in Korean agencies. Additionally, a follow-up research is required to identify the role of the Committee for International Development Cooperation in managing the quality of evaluations conducted by ODA implementing agencies and supporting them in improving evaluation quality management practices. -
Central Asia’s Medium- to Long-term Trade Strategies and Korea-Central Asia Cooperation Plans
The objective of this research is to derive the future directions of cooperation between Korea and Central Asia amid rising global uncertainty in the face of competition and confrontation between significant powers with no resolut..
Minhyeon Jeong et al. Date 2022.12.30
ODADownloadContentSummaryThe objective of this research is to derive the future directions of cooperation between Korea and Central Asia amid rising global uncertainty in the face of competition and confrontation between significant powers with no resolution in sight, and as the strategic value of economic security increases. We are facing a period of fragmentation of the global value chain. Korea’s economy, which has scarce natural resources and relatively abundant high-quality human capital, has long relied on expanding markets through trade and increasing efficiency through resource allocation through the international division of labor as the foundation of economic growth. Therefore, in the current era of increasing global economic uncertainty obscuring even near-future prospects, it is an urgent time to establish a new external cooperation system more appropriate for the times. Especially in the situation where the sanctions on the Russian economy are expected to be prolonged, the geographic value of Central Asia, which connects Russia and Europe, has become more prominent. In addition, considering the rich natural resources and relatively young population structure of Central Asia, expanding cooperation with Central Asia has even more significant implications. In this study, based on the developmental level of each individual country, we classified the five Central Asian countries into three middle-income countries (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan) and two low-income countries (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) based on the commonalities and differences revealed in the structural characteristics of each country’s economy. This classification enables us to more systematically understand the growth issues that Central Asia’s middle- and low-income countries need to resolve for sustained growth, and to provide macro-level answers for the direction of cooperation between Korea and these countries.In chapter 2 of this report, long-term growth challenges for each of the Central Asian countries are identified. Firstly, challenges blocking the growth of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan, which are middle-income countries in Central Asia, are summarized as diversification and advancement of industrial structure. Despite high growth, the development of medium- and high-value-added manufacturing industries that play an essential role in productivity improvement is being delayed. The delay in industrial structure transformation to medium-and high- value-added industries hinders the essential qualitative growth for the long-term growth of middle-income countries in Central Asia, which could lead to chronic growth delay akin to the so-called “middle-income trap.” On the other hand, the growth challenges of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, low-income countries in Central Asia, can be summarized as expanding industrial infrastructure through physical capital accumulation. It is necessary to expand physical capital to form industrial infrastructure quickly. Through this, it becomes possible to embed labor in labor- intensive export goods such as food and clothing instead of directly exporting labor to neighboring countries and selling them overseas. In order to do this, it is necessary to establish a domestic industrial infrastructure suitable for the country’s stage of economic development by utilizing relatively abundant labor compared to neighboring countries.Chapters 3 to 5 outline the directions for cooperation in digital, climate change, and health and medical fields. The directions were derived mainly from material cooperation related to physical capital, and human resources cooperation related to human capital. According to the empirical data examined, there were significant differences in the demand for cooperation between Central Asian low- and middle-income countries in all the three fields mentioned above. This is because the overall cooperation environment, including digital industry technology, infrastructure, and system laws and regulations; energy and power infrastructure; and health and medical infrastructure and technology, varies depending on each country’s economic development level. The direction of cooperation with Central Asian middle-income countries can be summarized as requiring state-of-the-art technology, infrastructure, and industrial cooperation in all the three areas mentioned above, along with higher-level professional and engineering exchange and transfer of managerial skills in terms of human exchange. On the other hand, cooperation related to urgent primary infrastructure expansion is primarily needed for low-income countries regarding material exchange, which has been shown to be effective for growth.
공공저작물 자유이용허락 표시기준 (공공누리, KOGL) 제4유형
대외경제정책연구원의 본 공공저작물은 "공공누리 제4유형 : 출처표시 + 상업적 금지 + 변경금지” 조건에 따라 이용할 수 있습니다. 저작권정책 참조