The Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) is a knowledge-sharing platform for development cooperation, aiming to share Korea’s economic development experiences and expertise with partner countries.
Our mission is to support the sustainable socioeconomic development of partner countries, promote strong and close economic cooperation, and contribute to the mutual prosperity of the international community.
The 2025 Annual Report covers KSP's 2024/25 projects, from launch in 2024 to completion in 2025.
Since its launch in 2004, KSP has steadily expanded
its reach due to strong international demand, while
remaining consistently focused on enhancing its system
to deliver more effective and impactful policy
consultations.
OECD
ITC
GGGI
TDB
IDB
WBG
ADB
AfDB
EBRD
UN-APCICT
CAF
CABEI
33.9
%
27.1
%
19.1
%
10.3
%
9.6
%
※ Excluding 2 multi-regional projects
While KSP initially focused on economic policy and industrial sectors, it has recently diversified its areas of cooperation to include infrastructure and the environmental sectors.
Public Management : 56 projects
Economic Policy : 60 projects
Industry : 149 projects
Infrastructure/Environment : 203 projects
No. of Countries No. of Projects
Lao PDR
Malaysia
Mongolia
Vietnam
Indonesia
Cambodia
Thailand
Philippines
Australia
Serbia
Spain
United Kingdom
Slovakia
Uzbekistan
Ukraine
Croatia
Kyrgyz Republic
Türkiye
Poland
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Ecuador
Honduras
Colombia
Cuba
Peru
Argentina
Paraguay
Oman
Jordan
Morocco
South Africa
Madagascar
Mozambique
Ethiopia
Kenya
Guinea
Côte d'Ivoire
Infrastructure and transport
36
projects
Energy
15
projects
Environment
9
projects
Water resources and sanitation
8
projects
Corporate Policy
12
projects
Industrial policy
10
projects
Science and technology
10
projects
Trade
2
projects
Agriculture fisheries, and rural
6
projects
Human resources development
4
projects
Health and medicine
1
projects
Macro and financial policies
12
projects
Economic development
1
projects
Public administration
14
projects
The 2025 KSP Dissemination Conference was held in conjunction with the APEC Finance Ministers’ Meeting, on Korea’s chairmanship of APEC. Under the theme “Bridging Knowledge and Prosperity for APEC and Beyond,” the conference served as a platform to share policy experiences within the APEC region and to discuss strategies and visions for advancing from knowledge sharing toward co-prosperity.
* Hybrid event (combining in-person and online participation)
The 2025 KSP Regional Seminar in Latin America and the Caribbean was held under the theme “Digital Innovation and Sustainable Growth” in response to the region’s challenges, including persistent productivity slowdown and structural growth constraints.
The 2025 KSP Outcome Management Seminar was organized to explore practical measures to strengthen the role of the Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) as a knowledge-based economic cooperation initiative, while ensuring its long-term sustainability and enhancing its function as a knowledge-sharing platform.
The webinar on the KSP project application is organized to provide partner country officials with guidance on the KSP project application process and proposal preparation. The project proposal serves as a critical document that captures partner countries’ policy status and specific consultation needs, and is used as a foundational reference for planning and selecting new KSP projects. Although the application procedures are annually communicated to partner countries in writing through Korean diplomatic missions, many counterparts have experienced difficulties in preparing proposals due to limited understanding of KSP’s policy consultation framework and its various project types, including fast-track projects and KSP Plus.
In response, the 2025 Webinar on KSP Project Application, held as part of the
2025 KSP Dissemination Conference, focused on introducing KSP’s evolving role as
an economic cooperation platform beyond policy advisory, as well as providing
detailed guidance on the project application procedures.
During the session, KSP presented its expected outcomes across
three dimensions: policy formulation, follow-up project
development, and broader economic partnerships, including
private-sector investment. Representative country examples
illustrated each dimension. In particular, the briefing
reflected a growing interest among partner countries in
linking policy consultation outcomes to subsequent
cooperation projects, emphasizing how KSP’s policy research
and networking activities bridge policy development with
tangible economic cooperation outcomes. Following the
briefing, one-on-one mentoring sessions were conducted with
representatives from Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Moldova, and the
Asian Development Bank (ADB), providing detailed guidance on
proposal preparation and submission procedures.
Project efficiency and effectiveness are enhanced by continuously tracking
project outcomes—using end-of-project reviews—against a baseline of policy
challenges identified through Preliminary Discussions and High-level Meeting.
Short-term outcomes are monitored for up to two years post-completion across
all projects. Mid-term outcomes, focusing on policy significance and interim
deliverables, are selectively tracked for projects three or more years
post-completion.
Preliminary Discussions and High-level Meeting
Initiation Stage
Interim Evaluation
Interim Stage
End-of-Project Interview
End Stage
Short-term Outcome Monitoring
2 years post-project
Mid-term Outcome Monitoring
3+ years post-project
Project outcomes are identified through a monitoring process classified into three categories and promoted as model KSP cases. The purpose of monitoring is to analyze the contributing factors in the delivery or non-delivery of desired outcomes and to establish causality. This analysis informs follow-up projects and provides feedback for annual project planning. Furthermore, monitoring facilitates ongoing communication with past participants, both domestically and internationally, helping to maintain the expert networks—a particular strength of KSP.
| Category | Subcategory | |
|---|---|---|
| Reflected in the partner country's policies | Establish relevant laws and regulations | |
| Develop policy documents and set aside budget | ||
| Establish/reorganize relevant agencies/organizations | ||
| Implement policies; translate into public services | ||
| Other (promote to policy stakeholders; enhance policy network; build capacity) | ||
| Promote development cooperation | Continuing collaboration with Korea | Mutual agreements (e.g., MOU and LOI) |
| Expert secondment | ||
| Follow-up education/training | ||
| Consultation on follow-up projects with relevant ministries and agencies | ||
| Technical support (e.g., KSP, EIPP, KOICA) | ||
| Financial support (e.g., EDCF, grants, infrastructure PPP) | ||
| Other ODA projects (public projects at central and local government levels or other public institutions) | ||
| Follow-up cooperation with international organizations | Technical support (international organizations) | |
| Financial support (e.g., loans, grants, infrastructure PPP) | ||
| Capacity building for KSP participants in Korea and greater participation in development cooperation projects | ||
| Promote economic cooperation | Alignment with private businesses (e.g., exploring business opportunities and feasibility study) | |
| Corporate social responsibility (CSR) | ||
| Support for companies doing business in partner countries | ||
| Direct investment | ||
| Public-private economic cooperation | ||
| Improvements in project conditions | ||
In 2025, mid-term outcome monitoring was conducted for 12 projects across three countries: Peru, Malaysia, and Kuwait. The analysis shows that, across all three countries, KSP policy recommendations were closely linked to institutional design and legislative processes, yielding advanced, substantive outcomes. Based on a comprehensive analysis of outcomes across the three countries, the key success factors for institutionalizing KSP projects can be summarized as follows.
When the policy demand of partner countries aligns closely with their national mid- to long-term strategies and fiscal and administrative systems, KSP recommendations are more likely to evolve into higher-level outcomes such as legislative amendments, the establishment of new institutions, and integration into national development plans.
Strong ownership by high-level policymakers, the capacity of implementing institutions, and the availability of sustainable financial resources play decisive roles in determining the depth and scope of outcome generation.
Early-stage achievements—such as the establishment of research organizations, the development of policy networks, and improvements in statistical infrastructure—are meaningful outcomes in themselves. However, when these achievements are effectively linked with follow-up projects, they can evolve into broader institutional diffusion at the national level.
Peru
Reflected in partner country's policies
Lack of an evaluation and guarantee system for innovative SMEs, making it difficult to link policy measures with financial support
Introduction of the PTRS technology evaluation model and establishment of a database-based technology guarantee fund
Reflected in partner country policies
Digitalization of education remained at an early stage due to limited digital infrastructure, insufficient teacher capacity, and the absence of administrative systems
Establishment of ICT Guidelines and incorporation of digital literacy into the national strategy
Reflected in partner country policies
Public sector professionalism, accountability, and performance management were limited due to the coexistence of 15 different personnel systems and more than 400 wage structures
Revision of the Civil Service Act, introduction of a performance-based personnel management system, and development of the first phase of an electronic HR management system, piloted across 34 government agencies
Reflected in partner-country policies & follow-up cooperation with Korea
Low utilization of FTAs due to complex rules of origin and insufficient training and administrative systems
Development of rules-of-origin training programs and manuals, assignment of dedicated personnel, and enhancement of VUCE 2.0. Policy advisory on system development was linked with the 2024/25 KSP follow-up project, strengthening the foundation for economic cooperation
Reflected in partner country policies
Weak performance of special economic zones and limited FDI inflows due to incomplete legal frameworks and fragmented authorities
KSP policy recommendations (location selection, taxation, and governance mechanisms) were directly reflected in the Special Economic Zone legislation
Malaysia
Reflected in partner country's policies
Structural constraints persisted, including stagnation in manufacturing, delays in digital transformation, and the absence of a systematic data management framework
Establishment of the Ministry of Digital and enactment of the Data Sharing Act (2024). Benchmarking of the Pangyo innovation cluster model during the upgrading of the Cyberjaya digital cluster
Reflected in partner country's policies
Railway safety systems remained structurally weak due to the absence of technical standards, insufficient accident investigation mechanisms, and a shortage of specialized personnel
Reform of the railway safety management framework, establishment of 16 technical standards, and introduction of verification procedures
Reflected in the partner country's policies
Weak foundation for developing the hydrogen industry due to incomplete legal and institutional frameworks, limited policy coordination, and governance uncertainty
Revision of the Gas Supply Act to regulate hydrogen, designation of regulatory authorities, development of hydrogen infrastructure, and strengthening of dedicated budgets and technical expertise
Kuwait
Reflected in the partner country's policies
Limited progress in economic diversification, rigid labor market structure, and a housing market dominated by single-family housing
Establishment of cooperation between the Public Authority for Housing Welfare (PAHW) and the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (LH), leading to follow-up urban development planning services for new town design
Reflected in the partner country's policies
Absence of a formal selection process for public investment projects, limited institutional capacity, and weak fiscal planning frameworks
Introduction of a three-stage pre-evaluation process for public investment projects, later referenced during legal and institutional reforms
Reflected in the partner country's policies
Fiscal sustainability risks intensified due to expanding welfare and subsidy programs and inefficient fiscal management
Seven key fiscal reform areas were incorporated into the Government Action Plan (2023–2027), including improvements in subsidy monitoring, tax system reform, and budget system restructuring
