Oda : (A Study on Aid Predictability: Focusing on Multi-Year Rolling Planning and Budgeting Framework)

Abstract

Korean Abstract: 2011년 제4차 부산세계개발원조총회(HLF 4)에서 모든 협력 대상국가에 대한 3~5년의 중기 연동지원계획(rolling plan)을 2013년까지 제공하기로 하고, 원조예산의 수립절차와 집행계획을 개혁하여 원조의 예측가능성을 높이는 데 국제적인 합의를 도출한 바 있다. 특히 한국은 부산 글로벌 파트너십의 집행위원회에 공여국 대표로 선출되어 부산총회 합의사항 이행을 위한 방안 및 이행계획 수립에 적극적으로 참여하고 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 다른 OECD 개발원조위원회 회원국들이 중기 원조예산을 어떻게 수립하고 이행하는지 비교ㆍ분석하고, 호주의 원조정책을 주요 사례로 ODA 예산절차, 예측성 강화방안을 어떻게 마련하고 있는지를 조사하였다. 이를 통해 한국의 중기 원조예측성 향상 방안에 대한 정책과제와 시사점을 얻고자 다른 주요 선진공여국의 원조예산 및 계획의 운용 메커니즘을 검토하여 원조예산의 효율성을 높일 수 있는 방안을 종합적으로 분석하였다. English Abstract: At the Fourth High Level Forum held in Busan in 2011, OECD Development Assistance Committee(DAC) member countries pledged to ensure that by 2013, they would provide partner countries with rolling three- to five-year indicative forward expenditures and/or implementation plans. Also, they made an agreement to enhance aid predictability by reforming the process of establishing and implementing the aid budget. Nevertheless, a limited number of studies reviewed the donor countries’ ODA budget systems and its operation mechanism to find the way to promote the effective use of the aid budget. This study examines how donor countries establish and implement multi-year aid budgets and applies the results to the Korean ODA budget system in order to improve mid-term aid predictability. The main findings of this study are as follows. First, several DAC members have made efforts to improve mid-term aid predictability by linking the forward strategic spending plans with their ODA budget process. Mokoro Ltd.(2011) has categorized aid planning and budgeting systems of OECD DAC member countries into three types; agency-wide rolling multi-annual programme, agency-wide cliff-edge multi-annual programme, and no agency-wide multi-annual programming with country-level multi-annual programming. Second, the Australian budget system, adopting no agency-wide multi-annual programming with country-level multi-annual programming, is selected as a good example that can be applied to the Korean system. Australia has been reforming its ODA policies since 2010. In order to increase aid effectiveness and predictability, Australia adopted the rolling four-year budget plan, aid budget system by program, and performance evaluation system on achievements of policy objectives. Third, Korea, however, does not present the explicit budget plan in the process of establishing Country Partnership Strategy(CPS). Thus, it is difficult to improve the effectiveness of mid-term plans as well as aid predictability. Moreover, Korea lacks a performance management system that enables reasonable distribution of the ODA budget by gathering feedback on performances of previous projects. The results from this study provide some policy recommendations as follows. First, Korea needs to develop a performance management system for ODA to utilize the feedback on previous performances as the standard of establishing and distributing the aid budget. Second, Korea should improve the budget structure to introduce multi-year ODA planning and mid-term budget system which are suitable for ODA projects that extend periods of time. Third, Korea should reduce the number of priority partner countries from 26 countries to 15 to 20 countries. In addition, consulting with partner countries, Korea should establish a three-year operation plan for each country and priority project support plans to enhance aid predictability.