Why do ineffective institutions persist without change? Divergent paths of public investment management systems in South Korea

This study explores why some evaluation systems evolve into learning institutions while others remain procedural and marginal, addressing a central dilemma in development governance. Focusing on South Korea’s Ex-Post Evaluation of Construction Works, the study examines why ineffective institutions persist without change. Although introduced under the same framework as the Preliminary Feasibility Study to strengthen the lifecycle management of public investment, their trajectories have diverged sharply. The findings show that continuous internal efforts have sustained the Ex-Post Evaluation, yet its weaker institutional influence, limited organisational and budgetary support and insufficient technical capacity have constrained its effectiveness, leaving it largely procedural. The study highlights the fact that meaningful improvement requires interaction among political, organisational, budgetary and technical conditions rather than internal reforms alone. Korea’s experience offers lessons for designing evaluation systems that ensure institutional continuity but also feedback, accountability and learning across the public investment management cycle.