The government of Korea selected 26 countries as major development partners and formulated Country Partnership Strategies (CPS) for these countries. To improve the implementation performances of the CPS, it is necessary to evaluate the results. However, the only performance evaluation framework for a mid-term review has been made in 2013. This research aims to derive the comprehensive and systematic ways to improve the implementation performances of CPS for Sri Lanka. Since the first CPS for Sri Lanka covers the period from 2012 to 2016, it is difficult to evaluate the implementation performances rigorously. However, it is necessary to prepare the 2nd CPS for Sri Lanka by reviewing the development demands of Sri Lanka and finding effective ways for implementation.
Chapter 2 examines the development demands of Sri Lanka based on the national development plan (Mahinda Chintana) and governance structure. Chapter 3 analyzes the CPS of major donor groups and elicits important implications. Chapter 4 summarizes the key contents of Korea's CPS for Sri Lanka and analyzes the implementation performances by using the evaluation framework. The analysis mainly focuses on relevance, efficiency and effectiveness. Chapter 5 suggests main areas of Korea's aid for Sri Lanka. The main results of the research are summarized as follows.
According to Mahinda Chintana, the government of Sri Lanka formulated specific development plans including the following key areas; ① expansion of national infrastructure, ② development of rural areas and productivity improvements in the agricultural sector, ③ productivity improvement in both the public and private sectors, and ④ education and health sectors. Korea selected ① economic and social infrastructure (improvement of road, development of hydro resources and renewable energy), ② human resources development (TVET and secondary education), ③ improvement of governance (improvement of administration system and capacity building of the government sector) as 3 major areas of development assistance for Sri Lanka. These 3 areas are consistent with the development demands of Sri Lanka. However, it needs to be aligned with previous areas in Sri Lanka's development demands within a more specific context. In order to improve the effectiveness of ODA, the particularities of Sri Lanka should be considered when Korea selects the ODA projects/programs.
First of all, in terms of social and economic development it should be considered that Sri Lanka is still recovering from the aftermath of its long civil war. Reconstruction of infrastructure is still in progress and there remain pockets of poverty (especially, in the northeastern areas). Even though rural area development is not a major area in Korea's CPS, it is necessary to expand assistance for rural area development. However, such assistance needs to be comprehensive programs, not independent projects.
Second, development demands, commonly identified with middle-income countries, are increasing in Sri Lanka. Since Sri Lanka is expected to become a middle-income country sooner or later, demands for social safety nets, capacity building for science and technology, and improved public services will increase. As the Sri Lankan government aims to construct a knowledge-based society, Korea needs to increase the IT related projects/programs.
Third, Korea needs to provide more policy consultations. Korea's development experiences would be very helpful because the Sri Lankan government is very keen on expanding the manufacturing sectors for sustainable development. However, the experiences of Korea cannot be applied to Sri Lanka directly. It is necessary to localize (or modify) these experiences by allowing for the specific circumstances of Sri Lanka.
Fourth, it is necessary to cooperate more actively with the development partners for harmonization. Since there are leading development partners for each major areas and the ownership of Sri Lankan government is strong, the information sharing and prior consultations with the development partners would increase the effectiveness of ODA. Even though the activities of the Development Partners Forum (DPF) are not satisfactory at this moment, KOICA and EDCF need to participate more actively in this forum.
Fifth, it is necessary to prepare an exit strategy. The relations with Sri Lanka will likely change from a recipient-donor to economic cooperation partner. In order to strengthen the basis for cooperation, it is necessary to expand private sector development and invitation training programs.
CPS of major donor groups also provides meaningful implications for Korea. For example, CPS of Japan has rolling plans and emphasizes economic cooperation through aid. Australia emphasizes aid harmonization and actively uses local experts from the private sector. On the other hand, MBDs (such as ADB and World Bank) are clearly focusing on the demands of Sri Lanka and their implementation process is systematic. ADB recently adopted Multitranche Financing Facilities (MFF) as aid modality, which emphasizes the sustainability of large size long term project/program, participation of recipient country and co-financing of other donor groups. World Bank is actively communicating with the stakeholders and regards consultation process as an important step. Risk management and flexibility are also emphasized by the World Bank. UNDP recognizes the importance of exit strategy for sustainability. These characteristics of other donors' CPS need to be reflected in Korea's CPS and its implementation.
To improve the implementation performances of CPS, Korea needs to ① select proper major assisting areas, ② strengthen the linkages with the private sector including PPP, ③ strengthen the linkages between grants and loans, ④ improve the predictability of aid by expanding rolling plans, and ⑤ improve aid harmonization.