Analysis on KOICA’s Environmental Mainstreaming: Focused on Its Organization and Institutions

Abstract

Environmental mainstreaming was discussed in recent OECD DAC ENVIRONET meetings and also emphasized in the previous DAC Peer Reviews of Korea. Definitions of environmental mainstreaming could be classified mainly based on two approaches: “do-some-good” and “do-noharm.” While most internationally recognized definitions try to combine the two approaches, KOICA’s definition focuses on the “do-no-harm” approach. Since 2006, according to its regulations on organization, KOICA has been through several organizational reshufflings. From an environmental perspective, it is divided into four major periods: pre-DAC-join period (2006~2007), green growth implementation period (2008~2013), transition to SDGs period (2014~2017), SDGs implementation period (2018~present) and Post COVID-19 (2020~present). During these four periods, “environment” has been taken charge of by different units, which chronologically include the Global Issue Team (2006), Environment and Gender Team (2007~2008), Climate Change Team (2009), Climate Change and Environment Department (2010), Climate Change Office (2011~2012), Climate Change and Environment Office (2013), Green Growth and Industry Team (2014), Climate Change and Environment Team (2015~2016), Climate Change and Environment Department (2017~2018), Strategy and Policy Planning for Development Programs Department (2018~2020), Climate Crisis & Pandemic Response Department (2020~present). To accelerate its environmental mainstreaming, KOICA might consider integrating the “do-some-good” approach into its current definition of mainstreaming and enhancing internal capacity to deal with environmental issues.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.