[\ub17c\ubb38 \uc548\ub0b4] \uc544\uc2dc\uc544\ub3c4\uc2dc\uc0ac\ud68c\uc13c\ud130\uc758 \uacf5\ub3d9\uc5f0\uad6c\uc6d0\uc778 \uc81c\uc774\ubbf8 \ub4c0\uc14b \uad50\uc218(\ub9e8\uccb4\uc2a4\ud130\ub300\ud559)\ub294 “Environment and Planning C” \ud559\uc220\uc9c0\uc5d0 “Anxieties of an emerging donor: The Korean development experience and the politics of international development cooperation”\ub77c\ub294 \uc81c\ubaa9\uc73c\ub85c \ub17c\ubb38\uc744 \uac8c\uc7ac\ud558\uc600\uc2b5\ub2c8\ub2e4.<\/p>\n
This article examines recent knowledge sharing initiatives aimed at promoting South Korea\u2019s development experience as a \u2018development alternative\u2019 and questions the coherence of the narratives being shared. Drawing upon an idea first put forward by\u00a0Anna Tsing<\/a>, I discuss how South Korea\u2019s development cooperation initiatives occupy a zone of awkward engagement in which multiple meanings of its experience have proliferated and explore the anxieties that this engagement creates for practitioners. In particular, the article finds that practitioner anxiety is informed by a triple set of pressures for Korea to\u00a0export<\/i>\u00a0an alternative development model,\u00a0extend<\/i>\u00a0the overseas activities of domestic businesses, and\u00a0entertain<\/i>\u00a0the ambitions of ruling political blocs. By focusing on questions of anxious engagement and the seemingly strategic ambiguity of knowledge sharing efforts it produces, the article highlights some of the limits and possibilities that shape the promotion of the Korean developmental state as an alternative development model for South\u2013South cooperation and extends the emotional register of literature on emerging donors by questioning discursive claims that privilege empathy and reciprocity as drivers of development cooperation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n