Effective Development Cooperation Research Articles

Sudan's health sector partnership: From confined progression to openness and hope to uncertain demise

AbstractMotivationDespite the signature of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and subsequent adoption of the principles of effective development co‐operation (EDC) for better health co‐operation, there is a gap in documenting the challenges to implement these commitments at country level. Sudan represents an interesting case study. The country adopted a local health compact in 2014, but for much of the time since the regime had been under sanction. Sudan witnessed a revolution in 2018, followed by a counter‐coup in 2021.Purpose: We aim to explore the evolution of the relationships, perspectives, and compliance of Sudan's health sector partners in terms of the EDC principles of ownership, alignment, and harmonization, while accounting for underlying processes and context changes between 2015 and 2022.Methods and approachWe collected data through two rounds of interviews, in 2015 (16) and 2022 (8), with stakeholders within the Sudan Health Sector Partnership. We used the framework method for data analysis where responses are coded and then sorted into themes.FindingsBefore the 2019 revolution, co‐operation was progressive but restricted, with civil society marginalized and a dominating government. The EDC principles, especially ownership, were misused and misaligned with national priorities driven by donors' interests and conditions.The transition period (post‐revolution) witnessed an influx of partners, characterized by their openness, but unstable leadership and subsequent changes in priorities led to wasted opportunities.Following the coup, donors adopted a no‐contact policy towards the de facto government. The expectation was that civil society organizations would replace the government as the main implementers. Overall, limited co‐ordination capacity and no sustainability measures were present throughout.Policy implicationsMuch of what was observed was due to the often complicated and difficult context of the governance of Sudan. However, general issues arose, including the government's ability to co‐ordinate policy and implementation; the need for stable, legitimate arrangements; and the need to define the role of civil society and empower civil society organizations. In a complex and volatile context, revisiting partners' commitments through joint compact reviews and transparent EDC progress monitoring is crucial.

The Green Climate Fund and private sector climate finance in the Global South

ABSTRACT Governments and international organizations are increasingly using public funds to mobilize and leverage private finance for climate projects in the Global South. An important international organization in the effort to mobilize the private sector for financing climate mitigation and adaptation in the Global South is the Green Climate Fund (GCF). The GCF was established under the UNFCCC in 2010 and is the world’s largest dedicated multilateral climate fund. The GCF differs from other intergovernmental institutions through its fund-wide inclusion of the private sector, ranging from project design and financing to project implementation. In this paper, we investigate private sector involvement in the GCF through a qualitative exploratory research approach. We ask two main questions: Do private sector projects deliver on their ambitious goals? What are the tensions, if any, between private sector engagement and other principles of the GCF (most importantly the principles of country ownership, mitigation/adaptation balance, transparency, and civil society participation)? This paper argues that private sector involvement does not provide an easy way out of the financial constraints of public climate financing. We show that the GCF fails to deliver on its ambitious goals in private sector engagement for a number of reasons. First, private sector interest in GCF projects is thus far underwhelming. Second, there are strong tradeoffs between private sector projects and the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) principles of country ownership, transparency, and civil society participation. Third, private sector involvement is creating a mitigation bias within the GCF portfolio. Fourth, while the private sector portfolio is good at channeling funds to particularly vulnerable countries, it does so mostly through large multi-country projects with weak country ownership. Fifth, there is a danger that private climate financing based on loans and equity might add to the debt burden of developing countries, destabilize financial markets, and further increase dependency on the Global North.

Exploring ‘Country Ownership’: An Analysis of Development Cooperation Practices of Selected European Partners in Bangladesh

Recognizing that the political environment that once fostered a global culture of top down, conditionality-driven aid delivery is no longer in place, this theoretically informed study provides insight into the emerging ‘aid and/or development effectiveness’ narrative. By exploring a case study of Bangladesh, it offers a nuanced analytical perspective on the role of donor agencies in managing development partnership at the country level. It interweaves a critical review of the concept of country ownership, the historical role of three major European donors, namely FCDO, DANIDA, and GIZ, and the conversation with select stakeholders to illuminate the ineptness of the ‘development effectiveness’ narrative in guiding our efforts aimed at creating a new aid architecture. In particular, our research findings call into question the assumption that donors are committed to the principles of country ownership. Contrary to the claims of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC), our study observes that the new language of development effectiveness and/or country ownership did not create a positive space for Bangladesh to manage its own development agenda. Instead of demonstrating their desire to promote self-reliant development, donor agencies and countries appear to have leveraged the development effectiveness rhetoric for advancing their own sociopolitical interests.

동남아 3개국 여성연맹의 활동과 역할

Purpose: Development actors that carry out gender projects in (post) socialist Southeast Asian countries, namely Vietnam, Laos and Myanmar are closely cooperating with the women’s unions (or federation) in these countries. This study aims to provide implications for effective gender development cooperation by analyzing and comparing historical trajectories, major activities, organization & operation, women-related governance and development project cases of women’s unions in these countries.
 Originality: By providing an in-depth analysis on women’s unions, this study aims to contribute to effective and sustainable cooperation with women’s unions in implementing women-related development projects in these countries.
 Methodology: This study employed literature review, institutional visits and semi-structured and focus group interviews in these three countries, and expert interviews in South Korea.
 Result: Women’s unions have strengths in vertical organizational structure with grassroot accessibility and top-down command system. However, their weakness lies in the lack of independence, unclear decision making procedure, weak human resources, and focus on traditional women’s role.
 Conclusions and Implication: Women’s unions in these countries can be effective partners in women-related development projects thanks to their top-down command structure and nation-wide network with grassroot accessibility. However, their focus on traditional gender role of women, priority agendas set by the Party, and bureaucratic prolongation of project implementation can become conflicting points and should be taken into consideration when carrying out projects.

Complementary or adverse? Comparing development results of official funding from China and traditional donors in Africa

While China has become an important source of aid and other official funding for Africa, its coordination with other development partners remains limited, and its contribution to development has been questioned. Despite different development models represented by China and traditional donors, recent studies demonstrated that funding from the two has similar determinants, but little was done to systematically compare their role for development. The paper evaluate their impacts on infrastructure, governance, external debt sustainability and dependence on natural resources. Furthermore, we explore whether there are (dis)advantages from the presence of both donors. Overall, we find that China has similar, beneficial, impact when compared with traditional donors on all the development dimensions but debt. The presence of both donors, in turn, has a positive effect on debt sustainability, but negative impacts on the other dimensions. We interpret these results based on effective development cooperation principles of ownership, alignment, harmonisation, and accountability.

A Decade Since Busan: Towards Legitimacy or a ‘New Tyranny’ of Global Development Partnership?

In 2011, the Busan Forum on Development Effectiveness announced the creation of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC). The GPEDC promised to replace the old donor–recipient dynamic in international development with ‘an equator-less landscape of multistakeholder global partnership’ (Eyben & Savage, 2013). Multistakeholder partnerships (MSPs) have since become the global governance modality of choice for the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Advocates maintain that MSPs provide more legitimate and effective governance than interstate multilateralism. But critics contend that MSPs co-opt subaltern voices and reinscribe power asymmetries: MSPs may, thus, constitute a ‘New Tyranny’ within global development governance (Cooke & Kothari, 2001). Drawing on extensive empirical research, this article examines the extent to which the GPEDC provides more legitimate governance or effects akin to a ‘New Tyranny’. Against dichotomous portrayals of MSPs as either inherently ‘legitimate’ or ‘tyrannical’, the article finds that MSPs such as the GPEDC constitute spaces wherein normative principles of world order are negotiated. Nevertheless, the article finds that we are no closer to a global development partnership than we were at Busan.

Aid, Multidimensional Poverty and Growth: Reversing the Micro-Macro Paradox in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone

This article analyses whether Official Development Assistance (ODA) is linked to multidimensional poverty indicators in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sustainable Development Indictors and the principles stated by the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation. Focused on three western Sub-Saharan Africa and least developing countries such as Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, this article uses Error Correction Vector Model to estimate if ODA and economic growth are cointegrated and a sectoral and spatial analysis to check if ODA are linked to Multidimensional Poverty Indicators in the sample countries. Despite the 2014 Ebola outbreak, the three countries have achieved noticeable good results in poverty alleviation. Results shows a certain macro-micro paradox because, despite a common trend between aid and growth identified at the macro level, we cannot find any sign of ODA contributions to the multidimensional poverty indicators when the micro level analysis is carried out. Our results may serve to increase the level of implementation of the ownership principle for effective development co-operation and achieve a significant improvement of several goals and targets included on the 2030 Agenda.

Japan\u2019s development cooperation for health in Vietnam: a first holistic assessment on Japan\u2019s ODA and non-ODA public resources cooperation

BackgroundJapan strives to strengthen its development cooperation by mobilizing various resources to assist partner countries advance on Universal Health Coverage by 2030. However, the involvement and roles of various actors for health are not clear. This study is the first to map Japan’s publicly funded projects by both Official Development Assistance (ODA) and other non-ODA public funds, and to describe the intervention areas. Further, the policy implications for country-specific cooperation strategies are discussed. The development cooperation for health in Vietnam is used as a case in this study.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis of the Japanese publicly funded health projects that were being implemented in Vietnam during December 2016 was conducted. A framework of analysis based on the World Health Organization six health systems building blocks was adopted. The projects’ qualitative information was also assessed.ResultsOverall, 68 projects implemented through Japanese public funding were analyzed. These 68 projects under 15 types of schemes were managed by seven different scheme-operating organizations and funded by five ministries. Of these 44 (64.7%) were ODA and 24 (35.3%) were non-ODA projects. Among the recategorized six building blocks of the health system, the largest proportion of projects was health service delivery (44%), followed by health workforces (25%), and health information systems (15%). Almost half the projects were implemented together with the central hospitals as Vietnamese counterparts, which suggests that this is one area in which the specificities of Japanese cooperation are demonstrated. No synergetic effects of potential collaboration or harmonization among Japanese funded projects were captured.ConclusionsSeveral Japanese-funded projects addressed a wide range of health issues across all six building blocks of the health system in Vietnam. However, there is room for improvement in developing coordination and harmonization among the diversified Japanese projects. Establishing a country-specific mechanism for strategic coordination across Japanese ministries’ schemes can yield efficient and effective development cooperation for health. While Vietnam’s dependence on external funding is low, the importance of coordination across domestic actors of the donor countries can serve as an important lesson, especially in beneficiary countries with high external funding dependency.

A Case Study on the Effectiveness of Operating and Managing the ICT Innovation Centres for Improved Educational Environment of Primary Education in Kenya focusing on the Results-Based Management

This paper presented a case of the ICT Innovation Centres in Primary Schools in Kenya for the effective operation and management of ICT integrated education based on the results of the centre users’satisfaction and improved competency in ICT in education. Global society pursed results-based management to materialize the principles of effective development cooperation. In line with the principle, the project team for establishing the Centres has supported the local operators to operate and manage the centres with the manual and surveyed to capture the results of the operation and management focusing on the users' satisfaction and competency. As result, these two centres encouraged the users to be exposed to use facilities and equipment for understanding ICT and applying it in their teaching and learning activities physically. In particular, these centres helped them to participate in community activities which were recognized as the foundation of sustainable operation and management of the centres. The teaching and learning environment significantly affected the users' satisfaction and improved competency. But, still, additional content would be required for enhancing the performance of the users. For the long-term results, this study proposed that the impact of using the centres should be monitored continuously to carry out tangible results of teaching and learning performance because the centres were operated less than a year and still required to stock relevant data.

An Exploratory Strategy on the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC): Applying the Delphi Method

An Exploratory Strategy on the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC): Applying the Delphi Method

Global development governance in the ‘interregnum’

Global governance is widely perceived to be ‘gridlocked’, ‘unravelling’, and ‘unfit for purpose’. The legitimacy of old institutions is breaking down, yet new institutions struggle to establish themselves as viable alternatives. Though overlooked, global development governance is no exception. Heterogeneous development actors, approaches, and understandings increasingly characterize the field. However, attempts to create a common platform have foundered. This article contributes to a growing body of literature that depicts world order as a Gramscian ‘interregnum’ to account for the crisis facing global development. Its primary contribution lies in the examination of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation as a vantage point to explore the politics, dynamics and struggles over the means and ends of ‘development’ in the current conjuncture. Here, competing projects vie for influence, yet none command the support necessary to supplant the ‘old' order. Although this article finds that the condition of ‘interregnum’ will likely persist, it also explores what transformative elements of a possible future exist within present practices.

A study on reinforcement disability-inclusive approaches to achieve SDGs: focusing on public-private cooperation projects centered on KOICA

본 연구는 두 가지 목적을 가진다. 첫째는 장애포괄적 개발협력에 대한 이해도 확대를 위해 SDGs의 달성을 위한 한국의 장애포괄적 국제개발협력의 현주소를 점검하는 것이며, 두 번째 목적은 ODA 이행에 있어 SDGs의 이행수단으로서 강조되고 있는 KOICA를 중심으로 하는 민관협력사업의 장애포괄적 접근을 활성화 할 수 있는 방안을 제시하는 것이다. 본 연구는 SDGs 달성을 위한 세계적 전략으로 제시된 장애포괄적 국제개발협력이라는 국제적 논의 속에서 한국의 장애포괄적 개발에 대한 실존적 현상을 분석·정리함으로써 이를 이론화하는 데에 기여할 수 있을 것이며, 한국의 장애포괄적 국제개발협력 및 이의 이행을 위한 장애포괄적 민관협력 방안을 고민하였다는 점에서 한국의 ODA 국제개발협력 정책의 발전에 기여 할 수 있는 중요한 연구라 할 수 있다. 본 연구의 목적 이행을 위한 연구방법은 국내외 장애포괄적 국제개발협력 관련 문헌 분석 및 KOICA의 실적 데이터 분석, 외국의 장애포괄적 국제개발협력에 대한 정책 프레임 및 장애포괄적 민관협력사업에 대해 비교하는 비교적인 관점을 활용하였다. 연구결과 SDGs 달성을 위한 장애포괄적 접근 및 민관협력사업의 강화를 위해서는 (1) KOICA의 장애포괄적 개발협력 이행을 위한 주도적인 역할 정립 및 이행 (2) KOICA 내에 장애이슈를 담당하는 담당부서의 마련 (3) KOICA의 ‘민관협력실’에서는 범분야 이슈에 대한 성과를 함께 달성할 수 있는 전략 모색 (4) 장애포괄적 개발협력사업의 이행을 위한 복지부 차원의 체계 정비 (5) 민관협력사업에 있어 장애포괄적 접근이 가능하기 위해서는 취약계층에 대한 분리통계의 생산 (6) 효과적인 장애포괄적 개발협력의 이행을 위한 이중-트랙 접근방법의 이행 방안 마련의 필요성을 제시되었다.This study has two purposes. The first is to check the current status of South Korea’s disability-inclusive international development cooperation in order to increase understanding of disability-inclusive development cooperation to achieve the SDGs. The second purpose is to suggest a way to promote disability-inclusive public–private partnership projects centered on KOICA, which are being emphasized as a means of implementing the SDGs. This study will contribute to theorizing on South Korea’s ODA history of disability-inclusive development by analyzing the existential phenomenon and to develop South Korea’s disability-inclusive public–private cooperation measures as an implementation strategy. Various studies related to international development cooperation were studied as the research methodology, including domestic and international disability-inclusive approaches and KOICA’s performance data as the comparative framework. The suggested ideas to facilitate disability-inclusive public–private cooperation include (a) establishing and implementing a leading role for KOICA’s implementation of disability-inclusive development cooperation, (b) establishing departments responsible for disability issues within KOICA, (c) having KOICA’s Private and Private Cooperation Office seeks strategies to accomplish achievements in cross-sectional issues, (d) developing a system at the Ministry of Health and Welfare for implementing disability-inclusive development cooperation projects, (e) producing separate statistics for vulnerable groups to enable comprehensive access to disabilities in public–private partnership projects, and (f) implementing a twin-track approach toward effective disability-inclusive development cooperation.

JessicaTrisko DardenAiding and Abetting: U.S. Foreign Assistance and State ViolencePalo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2020. 198 p. $30.00 (paper).

This book is a history of American “foreign assistance,” to use, as the author does, the old-fashioned term. The theme of the book is that, far from eliciting responsible behavior and achieving positive results in recipient countries, US assistance has, not infrequently and with sometimes horrific impact, facilitated state violence; its victims being collateral damage of US foreign policy. The introduction provides an excellent fast-forward tour d'horizon of American assistance from Truman and the origins of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), through the Cold War and decline of communism, through the post-9/11 war on terrorism, bringing us to the present. It embeds assistance in the broader, evolving policy goals of each US administration; a rope of intertwined altruism and self-interest passed from one to the next. There have been outbreaks of virtue; there have been convulsions of cynicism, but none has threatened to break the rope. A theory is proposed (Chapter 1) based on the proposition that among aid's effects, regardless of its intended purpose, is to increase recipient governments’ capacity to coerce their political opposition and the citizenry in general—money is fungible; fiscal constraints are loosened. No one is going to put up a statue to the author for this insight, but it provides a reasonably solid foundation for what follows. Empirical trends in foreign aid and state violence are presented in Chapter 2. The remainder of the book consists of well-researched and interesting case studies of US foreign assistance to Indonesia, El Salvador, and South Korea and the abuses it enabled. A brief chapter near the end brings the story up to date for the current century, with a special focus on the sad story of South Sudan. In conclusion, the author convincingly argues that American aid policy never took seriously the fundamental rule Primum, nolo nocere—“First, do no harm.” Right, but again, no statue; the dark side of aid has been known for years, at least by economists. It distorts labor markets, sends the price of nontradables soaring, balloons the money supply, and so on. Such harmful economic consequences may not be written in blood, but they are written in dollars and cents that have their human consequences nonetheless. The author's standard is also questionable. The nolo nocere rule is fundamental in humanitarian relief, but that is only a small corner of the global development project; in fact, the humanitarian relief and development communities think very differently. An analytical angle not well-developed is the fact that foreign assistance is embedded in incentive structures at all levels, from the village civil society organization in the South looking for survival to mightiest Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the North looking for entry points and leverage. Surprising, also not much thematized is the fact that, in this Age of Jihad, development and security policies (the latter encompassing both external and internal) have blended. The military and law enforcement establishments have become enthusiastic supporters of development assistance—former US Defense Secretary James Mattis apocryphally remarked “The less aid you send, the more bullets I have to buy.” Finally, and at the highest geostrategic level, US and Western foreign assistance has to be considered as a counter to China's emergence as a country-buyer and Russia's as a state provider of guns-for-hire. The author asks, in closing, whether a nolo nocere foreign assistance policy is possible. Probably not on her terms, because what she is really objecting to in this book is not foreign assistance per se; it is the harmful and ill-conceived US foreign policies to which it has been (and is) handmaiden. Channeling more aid through NGOs, rather than governments, she recognizes, is a nonstarter—they cannot move the sums required; in addition to which, it could be added, they are not without legitimacy issues of their own. Anyone who constructs with any common sense the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation that emerged in 2012 from the Fourth High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness at Busan—for nonplayers, the high-level commitments under which the Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs are pursued—knows that the aid game is played government-to-government with respect for civil society that is due, but not an iota more. Better monitoring and evaluation (M&E), the author suggests, is called for, as is taking financial sustainability more seriously at design stage; those are sound points. But one finishes the book convinced that foreign assistance as currently practiced, like little Sir John Barleycorn in the old song, will prove, despite efforts to suppress, reform, or sanitize him, the strongest man at last. The money has got to flow, and as long as it does, it is likely to sometimes give rise to the mischief this book effectively documents. As to style, the reader could not ask for a more informative, brisker policy history read. The only jarring note is the preface, which needed wise editorship at Stanford University Press—in a work of scholarship, authorial identity-speak and outrage are best indulged in seldom and in doses so small as to border on the homeopathic. A sentence or two would have done.

AID EFFECTIVENESS AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BUSAN PRINCIPLES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE EU AND TURKEY IN ETHIOPIA, SOMALIA, NIGERIA AND NIGER

This paper focuses on a comparative empirical analysis of the degree of implementation of the four Busan Effective Development Cooperation Principles (BEDCPs), namely ownership, focus on results, inclusiveness, transparency and accountability and some of its related indicators by Turkey and the EU in Ethiopia, Niger, Nigeria, and Somalia, as well as on the critical assessment of the plausible explanatory factors drawn from three core IR theories (neorealism, constructivism, and neoliberalism) behind eventual differences in the performance by the EU and Turkey of the BEDCPs in the four sub-Saharan African countries. The first main finding is that in comparison to the EU and except Indicator 6 and to a certain extent Indicators 1a and 9b (especially in Somalia and Nigeria), Turkey has shown a lower performance against the remaining five indicators, namely Indicators 5a,10, 2, and 4, in Nigeria, Somalia, Niger, and Ethiopia. Second, regarding the explanatory factors behind unevenness in the implementation of BEDCPs by the EU and Turkey, the results of our investigation show that in most of the cases, it was a combination of self-interest with norms or the level of interdependency that explained the different behavior of Turkey and the EU vis-à-vis BEDCPs in our four country case studies, although identity-related factors prevail.

Aid Effectiveness in the Sustainable Development Goals Era Comment on ""It's About the Idea Hitting the Bull's Eye": How Aid Effectiveness Can Catalyse the Scale-up of Health Innovations".

Over just a six-year period from 2005-2011, five aid effectiveness initiatives were launched: the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005), the International Health Partnership plus (2007), the Accra Agenda for Action (2008), the Busan Partnership for Effective Cooperation (2011), and the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation (GPEDC) (2011). More recently, in 2015, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (AAAA) was signed at the third international conference on financing for development and the Universal Health Coverage (UHC) 2030 Global Compact was signed in 2017. Both documents espouse principles of aid effectiveness and would most likely guide financing decisions in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) era. This is therefore a good moment to assess whether the aid effectiveness agenda made a difference in development and its relevance in the SDG era.

Perspectives on the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation

The establishment of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) created the unique opportunity to bring together and explore synergies between South–South cooperation (SSC) and traditional aid, or North–South cooperation. However, the GPEDC lacks support from both sides due to a lack of trust and misconceptions among partner countries. This article discusses the challenges of operationalising the GPEDC as a truly global and inclusive partnership. This is done by analysing differences between North–South and South–South cooperation and the challenges of bringing them closer. Furthermore, the particular reasons of individual SSC providers, the rising powers in particular, for withholding support for the GPEDC are identified and looked at in the context of fundamental differences between SSC and OECD-DAC aid.

Swedish Development Cooperation and Ownership of African Regional Organizations

This article deals with the ownership of African regional organizations (ROs) in the context of an overreliance on foreign funding. It focuses specifically on whether and how Swedish development cooperation contributes to the ownership of ROs on the continent. Sweden constitutes a particularly pertinent case study for several reasons: it is one of the world’s largest and most important donors to African ROs, it places great emphasis on the ownership principle and it is often considered to be a role model for effective development cooperation. The empirical material consists of an in-depth study of Swedish regional development cooperation with sub-Saharan Africa (2010–2015), policy reports and reviews, aid evaluations and a range of semi-structured interviews with Swedish and African aid officials. This study reveals a series of challenges regarding what is to be owned and by whom, and Sweden’s stress on building the capacity of the secretariats of ROs as the main way of strengthening ownership.

A Study of Linkage Cooperation and Sustainable Development for Capacity Development

인재양성은 협력국의 지속적인 발전을 위해서 매우 중요하다. 특히 대학의 역량(capacity)개발은 인재양성의 핵심이자, 국가발전의 토대다. 대학은 구성원의 역량, 내부 조직 운영, 시설 및 인프라 구축을 기반으로 발전한다. 이는 UNDP의 역량개발인 개인(individual), 조직(organizational), 그리고 경(enabling environment) 수준으로 설명된다. 특히, 역량개발은 개인은 물론 기관의 지속가능한 발전을 견인하므로, 지속가능발전목표(SDGs)시대에 더욱 중요하다. 본 연구의 목적은 역량개발을 위한 지속가능한 발전 방안을 제시하는 것이다. 이를 위해 라오스 교육개발협력 사례를 분석하였다. 사례분석 결과, 대학의 발전을 위해 설립부터 발전전략을 마련했고, 전략에 의거하여 협력사업을 추진했다. 이러한 협력사업을 연계협력하여 개인 및 조직의 역량개발에 기여했고, 결국 지속가능한 발전의 토대를 구축했다. 라오스 교육개발협력 사업은 연계협력과 지속가능한 발전이 상호 시너지 효과를 거두는 협력 네트워크 모델의 좋은 사례다.It is very important for human resources development to develop sustainable of partner country. Specially, capacity development of university is a key of human resource development and it become on base the development of nation. The university is to develop through based on the facility and infra, capacity of staffs and effective management etc. This case corresponds with UNDP’s capacity development process such as individual, organizational, and enabling environment. This capacity development will prospect more important in SDGs era because it engage with the sustainable development of individual and institutions. The purpose of this study is to effective development cooperation to suggestion the sustainable development through capacity development. For this, the author analyzed case study of educational development cooperation in Lao PDR. In result, Souphanouvong University set up the development strategy from the beginning stage and implemented the cooperation project according to strategy. These cooperation project contributed on capacity development of individual and organizational through linkage each other, and finally, it formed the basis of sustainable development. This case study shows the best practice of cooperation network model for synergy effect between linkage cooperation and sustainable development.

Development Cooperation: Between the Global and Regional Institutions: The Case of the UN Development Cooperation Forum and the OECD Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation

This paper is a first attempt to apply the regime complex analysis to the issue area of international development cooperation mainly applied for the study of international trade and environment regimes. We focus on the interactions between the UN Development Cooperation Forum (DCF) and the OECD-led Global Partnership for Effective Development (GPEDC). Following a synthetic approach combining the realist and institutionalist IOs theories, and drawing also from the literature on the interrelations between global and regional institutions, we tried to relate the strategic actions of state actors, mainly traditional and emerging development cooperation providers, to the dynamics of the interaction between the DCF and the GPEDC, and its observed patterns: cooperation, competition and division of labour.

In or Beyond Aid: The Difficult Path of Policy Coherence for Development

Analyses of Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) began to arise in the OECD more than two decades ago. These approaches have evolved while the discussions about the necessary reform of the system of international cooperation were taking place. However, the meetings in Rome, Paris, Accra and Busan, and the Aid Effectiveness Agenda, focused on a technocratic and unilateral vision of efficiency, away from the approach of CPD. Subsequently, the creation of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation has not meant a change of course on this issue. The article shows the striking absence of the CPD at conferences and declarations, which contrasts with its remarkable evolution in the doctrinal level, and raises the potentialities of the 2030 Agenda for the CPD.