Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to critically review the Korean Official Development Assistance (ODA) policy in terms of its context, actors, structures, and values so as to find how these characteristics are reflected in the education ODA of Korea. Previous studies, documents of Korean Government, and ODA-related statistics are reviewed. Self-confident in being transformed from a poor recipient country to a DAC donor, Korean government emphasizes the so-called Korean ODA Model in sharing its economic development knowledge and experiences with the developing countries. Despite the coordination effort by Prime Minister’s Office, government ministries tend to pursue its own ODA policies, while the finance ministry and the ministry of foreign affairs play major roles. As a result Korean ODA is economy-oriented, fragmented, and uncoordinated in planning and implementation. This study has found that such characteristics of Korean ODA are also reflected in the education ODA. For instance, TVET and higher education are the priority, while basic education is neglected, and the education ministry has its own ODA policies and programs. Outside studies on Korean ODA policy is rather scarce, furthermore, critical reviews other than policy advocacy are hard to find, particularly in English. This study will be a good start for further ones to understand the Korean ODA policy including education.

The purpose of this paper is to critically review the Korean ODA policy in terms of its context, actors, structures, and values so as to find how these characteristics are reflected in the education ODA of Korea.

This study modifies and adopts the analytical framework of contingency, agency, structure, and ideology in historical sociology of education. Previous studies and documents of Korean Government are reviewed to find the relevance to the above analytical framework.

This study has found that the characteristics of Korean ODA policy, such as economic orientation, are reflected in the education ODA practices.

Studies on Korean ODA policy is rather rare, moreover, critical reviews are hard to find, particularly in English. This study will be a good start for further ones to understand the Korea ODA policy.

This chapter highlights the characteristics of Asia through the analysis of policy-related documents by five donor countries, namely Japan, South Korea, China, India and Thailand. It will also examine the roles played by regional bodies such as the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) and ASPBAE (the Asia South Pacific Association for Basic and Adult Education) as the horizontal channels influencing aid policies in respective countries. Together with the analysis of the national and organizational policies, the regional process of building consensus on the post-2015 agenda is examined, with a particular focus on the Asia-Pacific Regional Education Conference (APREC) held in August 2014.

The analysis reveals that the region has two faces: one is imaginary and the other is functional. There is a common trend across Asian donors to refer to their historical ties with regions and countries to which they provide assistance and their traditional notions of education and development. They highlight Asian features in contrast to conventional aid principles and approaches based on the Western value system, either apparently or in a muted manner. In this sense, the imagined community of Asia with common cultural roots is perceived by the policymakers across the board.

At the same time, administratively, the importance of the region as a stage between the national and global levels is recognized increasingly in the multilateral global governance structure. With this broadened participatory structure, as discussed in the chapter ‘Post-EFA Global Discourse: The Process of Shaping the Shared View of the ‘Education Community’’, the expected function of the region to transmit the norms and requests from the global level and to collect and summarize national voices has increased.

This explorative study aims to compare and analyze the behavior of a traditional and an emerging donor, namely, Germany and South Korea, in the field of climate change-related official development assistance (ODA). It analyzes their ODA projects in 2013 in four Southeast Asian countries severely affected by climate change, namely, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. It also adapts the existing framework to categorize ODA allocation according to receiving countries’ need and merit and donors’ self-interest.

The paper first describes both countries’ policies and activities. It then uses a country’s vulnerability to climate change as a measure of its need, its climate change readiness as a measure of its merit and its bilateral trade volume in environmental goods with donor countries as a measure of donors’ self-interest to analyze the allocation of climate-related ODA.

Results suggest that Korean ODA in the field of climate protection is driven more by receiving countries’ need and merit, but self-interest seems to be important for both donors. In addition, many projects labeled as adaptation or mitigation projects only have a weak link to these goals. There are limitations to the present paper. First, it could only analyze projects in 2013 because there are no earlier project data available in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Creditor Reporting System. Second, because of the simplifying assumptions of the need–merit–self-interest framework, possible other determinants of aid allocation were deliberately ignored. Finally, this explorative study is restricted to four vulnerable countries in Southeast Asia.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to compare a traditional and an emerging donor’s behavior and to explore the allocation of climate-related ODA using the need–merit–self-interest framework.

This chapter will situate the global paradigm shift toward Post-Education-For-All (Post-EFA) not only in the policy trends in the field of international education development, but also in the academic context of international relations and comparative education.

The chapter highlights three dimensions which characterize the paradigm shift; namely, discourse on norms, diversifying actors, and the changed mode of communication and participation in the global consultation processes. The existing formal structure of the EFA global governance is based on multilateralism which recognizes sovereign nation-states, representing national interests, as the participants. However, such an assumption is eroding, given that there is a growing number of state and nonstate actors who influence decision-making not only through conventional formal channels, but also informally. Urging the revision of theories of multilateralism, the chapter introduces the attention given to nontraditional donors and horizontal networks of civil society actors in this volume.

The introduction also shows that that the widening basis of participation in the global consultation processes on post-EFA and advanced communication technology have changed the ways in which discourse is formulated. While the amount and the speed of exchanging information have been enhanced and different types of actors have been encouraged to take part, it also obliges scholars to adopt innovative methods of analyzing discourse formation.

The chapter also demonstrates the importance of the focus on the Asia-Pacific region, which is composed of diverse actors who often underscore Asian cultural roots in contrast to Western hegemony. By focusing on the discourse, actors, and the structure through which the consensus views on the post-EFA agenda were built, the volume attempts to untangle the nature of the post-EFA paradigm shift, at the global, Asia-Pacific regional, and national levels.

This chapter focuses on South Korea’s newly found regional leadership, as the emergent middle power of East Asia, in order to advance regional integration and institution-building. Policy leadership is observed and analyzed from an international lens, linked to the literature of middle powers. The chapter first conceptualizes middle powers in connection with the issue of international leadership, since such states often play important roles in promoting cooperation. The chapter looks especially into South Korea’s foreign policy behavior toward East Asian regional processes and how it has manifested innovative and capable leadership. More specifically, the last three presidencies of Kim Dae-jung (1998–2002), Roh Moo-hyun (2003–2008), and Lee Myung-bak (2008–2013) are scrutinized in the hope of underscoring how their particular administrations, political leadership, and strategic approaches to foreign policy toward the region influenced South Korea’s regional leadership attempts and middle power status.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the policy trends for the internationalization of higher education in Korea, and suggest a future direction toward the pursuit of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

This paper presents a case study of Korea focusing on its internationalization in higher education. In order to analyze the government policy trends and institutional strategies for internationalization, the relevant literature and documents were analyzed.

The government policy for the internationalization of higher education in Korea has consisted of three stages: first, controlled outbound mobility; second, a major shift and focus on inbound mobility, recently along with intraregional cooperation for both directions of mobility in Asia and third, the beginning of efforts toward the pursuit of the SDGs, which needs to be expanded and systematized further.

This paper shows presents the comprehensive review of internationalization policies in Korean higher education, including the recent programs and changes at both the governmental and institutional levels. There has been a notable lack of discussion on the SDGs in relation to the internationalization of Korean higher education, which is addressed in this paper.

This paper aims to critically investigate the past hype of internationalization of higher education institutions (HEIs) and its complex international, national and local processes under the influence of globalization.

In particular, the authors employed the knowledge–policy–power interface framework through a scoping review in order to reexamine the political dynamics among international, national and local higher education actors in driving the internationalization of HEIs in the context of South Korea between the 1990s and the 2020s. The perspective taken by this research brings much-needed nuance to the analysis by focusing on the complex dynamics of external factors and key actors and their responses in the process of internationalization.

This research found three characteristic dynamics of internationalization of Korean HEIs: uncritical acceptance of external pressures for internationalization; unbalanced formal and informal participation at the national level and different ways HEIs absorb change. In short, this research discussed how the powerful government, which has been stirred by external forces, shaped the limited knowledge discourse on internationalization while triggering power games among various HEIs. The research highlights that the characteristics of HEIs and the voices of all stakeholders should be better accounted for so that internationalization can proceed in diverse ways from the ground up to enhance and assure educational quality.

The research limits itself by analyzing the political dynamics in driving the internationalization of HEIs in the context of South Korea only through scoping review. However, the attempt to disentangle the underlying political dynamics through its original framework is worthy unlike previous more traditional models that cast policy-making as a uniform cycle proceeding rationally through the policy process regardless of the issue.

These findings enable a better analysis of the key dynamics of how HEI internationalization policies in Korea were understood, planned and implemented. Without examining the political dynamics among various factors as well as the responses of significant actors to HEI internationalization, the current challenges and remaining tasks in translating higher education policy into practice cannot be thoroughly assessed.

Most importantly, the multilayered political dynamics that come together to shape the content and directions of policies in a certain national context should be taken into account in the process of policy-making. Such recontextualization would provide a better understanding of the underlying dynamics that lead to certain consequences of and challenges in translating higher education policy into practice, especially for those who face the challenge of balancing between state-driven policies and ever-diversifying needs and demands of HEIs.

As there is a lack of understanding of the critical context of the knowledge–policy–power interface despite the significant influence of political dynamics in the process of internationalization, this research reexamined the internationalization of HEIs in Korea by providing a better understanding of the political dynamics between knowledge and power that influence the directions and contents of policy dialogues and documents.

This study attempts to introduce South Korea's unique experiences of civic operations made in Iraq and Lebanon. Koreans approached it with extreme caution since they are seeing through two different lenses: “paying back syndrome” from the Korean War experiences is colliding with the “Vietnam syndrome” from the experiences of Vietnam War. Expanding its regional role through revitalizing PKOs is not an easy job for the ROK government despite the fact that President Lee has committed himself to increase its efforts since his campaign days. South Korea recently decided to send its KDX-II type destroyer to Somalia for joining the maritime peacekeeping while people in Korea strongly suspect that the Obama administration would soon request to send its troops to Afghanistan as a part of International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). As the Korean society is getting democratized, progressive NGOs have been opposing the government decision to send forces to assist the U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. It remains to be seen how President Lee persuades people to bear the burden and endure sacrifices. At least, four problems need to be addressed for Korea to become a major troop-contributing country (TCC): first, Korea needs to enact laws to deal with South Korea's participation in the UN PKOs. Second, Korea needs to find a way to include civilian experts in future activities of UN PKOs. Third, it needs to increase the budget and size of standby forces. Lastly, it needs to educate people to understand why Korea has to contribute further to make a safer world. It remains to be seen whether South Korea will continue to focus on its stabilization and reconstruction efforts without sending its combat troops.

Official development assistance (ODA) education projects have played a crucial role in improving education and training fields in developing countries, but are often facing several considerable challenges (e.g. long implementation time). Thus, this study aims to identify critical success factors (CSFs) in ODA education projects and investigate the influences of CSFs on ODA project performance measured by 11 nonprofit outcomes (NPOs).

A comprehensive literature review and expert interviews were conducted to compile a list of 35 potential success factors for ODA education projects. Using a survey questionnaire, 143 valid responses were collected from practitioners joining ODA projects in Vietnam. Various statistical methods (e.g. mean score method, Spearman rank correlation test, analysis of variance test, factor analysis and regression analysis) were used to analyze the collected data.

This research identified seven CSFs for ODA education projects in Vietnam: comprehensive project management competency (C1), clarity and compliance in project execution (C2), transparency and committed funding (C3), external context conditions (C4), well-controlled design and project management procedures (C5), preparations in equipment and complexity insight (C6) and punctual site delivery (C7). Furthermore, the results of regression analysis indicated that comprehensive project management competency (C1) and transparency and committed funding (C3) could significantly affect various NPOs.

This study offers significant insights for practitioners (e.g. project managers) to improve ODA projects’ performance and effectiveness in the education and training sector of a developing country context (like Vietnam).