고려대학교

초록/요약

This study focuses on the evaluation of Japan’s environmental Official Development Assistance (ODA). Other donor countries criticize Japan’s environmental ODA by insisting that its high portion of loan assistance and regional preference for the Asian region cause a low quality. To examine whether this criticism is persuasive, I review existing literatures and evaluate Water Supply and Sanitation (WSS) loan projects in China as well as India by using five criteria of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC)’s Quality Evaluation Standards. Through these case studies, I find out that the overall level of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts, and sustainability of Japan’s WSS loan project in China is highly satisfactory, while that in India is moderately satisfactory. These results demonstrate that the quality of Japan’s environmental ODA is not low as other countries criticized. Moreover, it implies that both a donor country and a recipient country decide the quality of environmental ODA. Accordingly, to improve the quality of environmental ODA, Japan, as a donor country, should decide a reasonable project scale; have measures to ensure transparency during the process of selecting and implementing environmental ODA projects; and make efforts to offer environmental ODA considering economic, political, and environmental circumstances of recipient countries. On the other hand, China and India, as recipient countries, should have regular meetings with a donor country to receive the most valuable environmental ODA by expressing their actual needs and ability to handle the projects.